UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


LIBRARY 


BaOK  CLASS  VOLUME 

335  W&STc 


COMMU^^ISM  AND  SOCIALISM 


IN 


THEIR  HISTORY  AND  THEORY 


A SKETCH 


BY 

THEODORE  D.  "WOODSEY 


NEW  YORK 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER’S  SONS 
1894 


Copyright  by 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER’S  SONS. 

1880. 


TRO-'^  niRfU-'ORY 

PRINTING  AND  BOOM  BINDING  COMPANY 
htW  YORK 


.9G 


PEEFACE. 


The  greater  part  of  the  work  which  is  now  offered 
to  the  public,  first  appeared  a few  months  since, 
under  the  form  of  weekly  articles,  in  the  New  York 
Independent.  It  is  now  republished  with  some  ad- 
ditions, which  are  chiefly  appendixes,  giving  the 
views  of  others  on  certain  special  points. 

The  object  of  the  work  wiU  be  suflaciently  evident 
on  shght  examination.  From  very  early  times  there 
has  been  felt,  under  several  forms  of  civilization  and 
rehgion,  a dissatisfaction  with  the  existing  institu- 
tions of  society,  which  has  given  birth  to  the  desire 
of  forming  communities  within  the  state  and  pro- 
tected by  it,  yet  separated  from  the  rest  of  the  peo- 
ple. Ideals,  also,  of  reformed  pohtical  societies  have 
been,  given  to  the  world,  which  grew  out  of  tin's 
same  dissatisfaction  with  the  actual  order  of  things. 
And  in  the  most  modem  times  these  Utopias  have 
passed  over  into  plans  for  a new  social  system. 


IV 


PREFACE. 


which  aims  at  gaining  the  control  over  all  civilized 
states.  We  have  attempted  to  sketch  the  leading 
features  of  these  smaller  communities  and  Utopias, 
and  of  modem  socialism,  founded  on  equality  and 
political  economy,  in  the  hope  of  showing  the  simi- 
larities and  differences  of  the  schemes,  devised  for 
carrying  on  the  work  of  society  without  private 
property. 

The  class  of  persons  for  whom  we  have  written, 
are  those  who  would  relish  neither  extensive  details 
touching  the  commimities  of  the  past,  which  have 
left  no  mark  on  society,  nor  a long  exposition  of  the 
economical  principles  of  modem  socialism.  Should 
this  system  gain  such  favor  as  seriously  to  threaten 
the  present  order  of  things,  we  earnestly  hope  that 
other  essays,  more  elaborate  and  comprehensive  than 
the  present  one,  will  be  written  for  its  confutation. 


New  Haven,  December,  1879. 


TABLE  OF  COISTTENTS, 


CHAPTER  I. 


1. 

II, 


DEFINITION  AND  ESSENCE  OP  COMMUNISM  AND 
SOCIALISM. 


PAGE 


1-16 

16-23 


CHAPTER  II. 

SMALLER  COMMUNISTIC  SOCIETIES  WITHIN  THE  STATE. 


I.  Buddhist  Monks — ^Essenes — TherapeutsB,  . 24-33 

II.  The  Christian  Monastic  System,  . . , 33-41 

III.  Anabaptists  of  Munster, 42-50 

IV.  The  Shakers, 50-60 

V.  Smaller  Communities  concluded,  ...  60  -72 

Appendix  I.  No  1.  Change  in  the  system  of  the 
Perfectionists,  73-75  ; No.  2.  New  matter  from 
Mr.  Hinds’  American  Communists,  ♦ . , 73-84 


CHAPTER  III. 

COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

I.  Plato — Sir  Thomas  More — Campanella,  . . 85-95 

II.  Theories,  in  France,  of  Mably  and  Morelly. 

The  same  reduced  to  Practice  in  Baboeuf’s 
Conspiracy,  . . . . . . . 96-106 


VI 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

III.  Theories  of  Communism — St.  Simon  and  his 

Followers — Fourier,  . 106-115 

IV.  Certain  Religious  Socialists — Laroux,  Cabet, 

Louis  Blanc,  . . . ...  . 115-125 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  INTERNATIONAL  WORKINGMEN’S  ASSOCIATION. 

I.  Origin,  Organization,  Rules,  ....  126-136 

II.  International  continued — Number  of  Mem- 

bers— Congresses  of  Geneva,  Lausanne, 

Brussels,  Basel, 136-146 

III.  International  concluded — Schism  in  Switzer- 
land— Its  Members  at  Paris  in  1871 — Mani- 
festo of  the  Council  at  London — Effects  of 
Events  at  Paris,  146-159 

CHAPTER  V. 

SOCIALISM  IN  GERMANY. 

I.  Leading  Features  of  the  Theory  of  Marx,  . 160-171 

II.  Lassalle  and  the  German  Workingmen’s  Union,  171-181 

III.  Socialism  in  Germany  since  Lassalle,  • . 181-192 

Appendix.  Mr.  Mill’s  Chapters  on  Socialism,  . 193-200 

CHAPTER  VI. 

SCHAEPPLE’S  “quintessence  op  SOCIALISM.” 


1 201-214 

II 214-226 


CHAPTER  VII. 

RECENT  SOCIALISM  IN  ITS  RELATIONS,  ETC. 

I.  To  the  State  and  to  Society,  ....  227-238 

II.  To  the  Individual  and  to  Religion,  . . . 238-249 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


vii 


PAGE 

III.  To  Religion  (continued),  to  the  Family  and 

Marriage, 250-260 

IV.  Relations  to  Society  concluded,  . . . 260-267 

Appendix  I.  Extract  from  the  Einfluss  der  Herr- 

schenden  Ideen  of  Eotvos, 267-271 

Appendix  IL  Extract  from  F.  A.  Lange’s  “ Arbeit- 
erfrage,”  Ed.  3, 271-275 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

I.  Is  the  Overthrow  of  Society  in  its  present 

Form  by  Socialism  probable  ? . . . 276-286 

II.  Future  Prospects  of  Socialism,  ....  287-299 

Index,  301—309 


i 


- /■<  '1. , 


COMMUNISM  AND  SOCIALISM. 


CHAPTER  I. 

DEFINITION  AND  ESSENCE  OP  COMMUNISM  AND 
SOCIALISM. 

L 

In  an  essay  like  this  it  seems  to  be  necessary  to 
define  the  terms  often  used  synonymously,  which 
are  employed  to  denote  the  subject  of  the  essay 
itself.  There  are  two  such  terms  yrhich  are  of 
constant  occurrence,  communism  and  socialism^ 
the  first  of  earlier  origin  than  the  other ; besides 
which  two  others,  of  still  more  modern  birth, 
collectivism  and  mutualism^  have  sprung  up  in 
^France,  and  are  less  current,  although  the  former 
of  them  is  now  often  employed  in  books  and 
public  discussions. 

Communism^  in  its  ordinary  signification,  is  a 
system  or  form  of  common  life,  in  which  the  right 
/ of  private  or  family  property  is  abolished  by  law, 
l,^^^utual  consent,  or  vow.  To  this  community  of 
goods  may  be  added  the  disappearance  of  family 
life,  and  the  substitution  for  it  of  a mode  of  life 
1 


2 


DEFINITION  AND  NATURE  OF 


in  which,  whether  the  family  system  is  retained 
or  not,  the  family  is  no  longer  the  norm  according 
to  which  the  subdivisions  of  the  community,  if 
there  are  any,  are  regulated.  But  while  the 
father’s  authority  in  the  separate  parts  of  the 
community  is  of  little  or  no  account,  there  are 
rulers  of  some  sort,  who  must  have  a considerable 
degree  of  power,  in  order  to  prevent  the  system 
from  falling  to  pieces. 

A whole  state  or  nation  may  be  conceived  of 
as  bemg  parcelled  out  into  a number  of  communi- 
ties, each  of  which  would  have  its  property  and 
its  rights  of  property  over  against  the  rest.  Yet 
all  the  communities  which  have  appeared  in  the 
world  have,  so  far  as  I know,  been  established 
within  states  which  are  not  themselves  commu- 
nistic in  their  institutions;  so  that  the  smaller 
bodies  are  protected  by  greater  bodies  which  have 
no  especial  affinities  with  them,  or  may  even  be 
regarded  by  them  with  dislike.  Whether  a state 
broken  up  into  communities  could  long  exist  may 
be  doubted.  So  also  the  theoretic  communities 
which  political  dreamers  have  imagined,  are 
either  small  and  simple,  or,  if  complex,  are  affili- 
ated, as  monastic  commimities  also,  generally,  are, 
under  a law  outside  of,  and  above,  their  own. 

2.  Socialism  was  not  known  as  a term  synonym 
mous,  or  nearly  so,  with  communism  until  recent 
times.  The  first  vTiters  who  can  be  discovered 
to  have  used  it  were  Frenchmen. 


COMMUNISM  AND  SOCIALISM. 


3 


By  its  derivation  it  ought  to  denote  the  system 
of  those  who  would  socialize  states  or  subdivisions 
of  states,  or,  in  other  words,  would  organize  the 
people  of  a nation  according  to  their  idea  of  what 
society  ought  to  be,  or,  in  other  words  still,  would 
reform  society  according  to  a social  theory  of 
their  own.  The  theory  might  or  might  not  cor- 
respond with  the  idea  or  the  rule  on  which  a com- 
munistic society  is  founded.  Socialism  is  there- 
fore a broader  term  than  communism.  It  might 
embrace  systems  for  a state,  and  systems  for 
smaller  communities  which  could  not  be  adapted 
to  a state ; it  might  include  community  of  goods, 
and  other  kinds  of  common  participation;  or 
might  even  discard  them,  as  far  as  the  derivation 
of  the  term  is  concerned.  But  in  matter  of  fact, 
having  been  coined  by  those  who  had  communis- 
tic principles,  and  in  an  age  when  it  was  desirable 
to  avoid  the  terms  communist  and  communism^ 
as  being  somewhat  odious,  it  denotes  almost  uni- 
versally a theory  or  a system  into  which  commu- 
nity of  goods,  or  better,  abolition  nearly  or  quite 
complete  of  private  property,  enters  as  an  essen- 
tial part ; and  again  a system  which  embraces  an 
entire  society  or  state,  if  not  a cluster  of  contigu- 
ous states,  or  even  the  world.  And  it  is,  as  thus 
used,  no  longer  a system,  if  I may  so  speak,  of 
disintegration,  but  one  of  consolidation,  subject- 
ing all  the  members  of  a state,  willingly  or  unwil- 
lingly, to  the  control  of  the  state  as  the  head  of 


4 


DEFINITION  AND  NATURE  OF 


society ; making  it  in  fact  the  sole  proprietor  for 
the  most  part  within  the  national  territory.  But 
although  the  term  thus  differs  from  the  term  coin- 
^munism^  we  may  be  pardoned  if,  in  following 
other  writers’  examples,  we  use  the  two  as  sy- 
nonymous now  and  then,  since  they  both  cover 
part  of  the  same  ground. 

3 and  4.  The  two  other  terms  need  only  a 
word  or  two  for  their  definition.  Collectwisnij 
which  is  now  used  by  German  as  well  as  by 
French  writers,  denotes  the  condition  of  a com- 
munity when  its  affairs,  especially  its  industry,  is 
managed  in  the  collective  way,  instead  of  the 
method  of  separate,  individual  effort.  It  has, 
from  its  derivation,  some  advantages  over  the 
vague  word  socialism^  which  may  include  many 
varieties  of  associated  or  united  life.  Mutualism 
(in  French,  mutuelisme\  scarcely  used  beyond  its 
birth-place,  is  intended  to  express  the  social  and 
political  condition  constructed  on  a system  of  mu- 
tual and  reciprocal  relations,  implying  equality  as 
far  as  it  can  be  carried  out.  The  community  of 
property  is  thus  an  inference  from  what  must 
come  to  pass  if  such  a conception  should  be  re- 
alized, rather  than  involved  in  the  word.  It  may 
be  worth  noticing  that  the  word  in  itself  at  its 
origin  had  nothing  communistic  about  it ; and 
that  mutuum^  mutuor^  in  Latin,  connected  with 
muto^  change,  exchange,  have  the  sense  of  a loan^ 
and  to  horrow.  The  Romans,  in  their  laws,  social 


COMMUNISM  AND  SOCIALISM. 


5 


life,  and  politics,  were  as  far  from  socialism  in 
the  modern  sense  as  possible. 

The  natural  division  of  the  subject  before  us  is 
to  consider  first  those  smaller  communities  which 
were  earliest  in  the  order  of  time,  and  came  into 
being  within  and  under  the  state ; — not  for  the 
purpose  of  undermining  general  society,  but  to 
enable  a select  number  of  similarly  disposed  per- 
sons to  lead  a life,  which  they  could  not  easily  lead 
without  some  separation  from  their  fellow-men. 
After  these  may  follow  those  theories  for  the 
rectification  of  existing  society,  which  were  never 
carried  out,  and  "perhaps  were  never  intended  to 
be  carried  out ; but  which  expressed  their  authors’ 
views  in  regard  to  the  best  constitution  of  society 
within  the  state.  These  theories,  as  time  ad- 
vanced, began  to  be  something  more  than  Uto- 
pias; they  became,  in  France,  revolutionary; 
they  were  animated  by  the  spirit  of  equality  and 
fraternity;  and  in  their  successive  forms  they 
approached  nearer  to  the  shape  of  definite  plans 
and  methods,  by  which  the  whole  of  society  was 
not  only  to  be  affected,  but  to  be  put  on  an  en- 
tirely new  basis.  At  the  same  time  the  condition 
of  the  working-class  became  a subject  of  promi- 
nent interest.  These  French  theories,  or  some 
of  them,  had  not  left  the  original  ideas  from 
which  they  started,  so  that  they  might  be  put  to 
proof  on  the  small  scale  in  single  communities 
and  by  way  of  experiment,  as  well  as  on  the  large 


6 


DEFINITION  AND  NATURE  OF 


scale  in  the  state.  Such  were  Fourier’s,  Cabet’s^ 
and  Louis  Blanc’s  systems,  although  they  aimed 
at  the  universal  control  of  societies.  We  shall 
term  these,  all  of  them,  communistic  systems. 
But,  by  the  help  of  the  later  French  communists, 
a new  system,  or  set  of  systems,  arose,  which 
could  not  be  well  applied  on  the  small  scale 
within  the  state,  but  aimed  at  controlling  the 
state  itself ; and  not  the  state  only,  but  even  a 
set  of  contiguous  states,  if  not  the  world.  The 
leading  characteristic  of  this  system  is,  that  it  is 
built  chiefly  on  political  economy,  as  understood 
by  the  advocates  of  the  system ; while  moral  no- 
tions, such  as  equality  of  rights  and  fraternity, 
are  assumed  and  involved  in  the  plans  for  carry- 
ing it  out.  The  main  force  of  the  theory  lies  in 
abolishing  private  property,  and  giving  the  con- 
trol of  all  industry  to  the  state.  It  does  not  re- 
quire a common  life,  but  carries  what  had  been 
before  contemplated — the  doctrine  of  common 
property — into  all  details.  As  reconstructing 
society  in  this  way,  it  is  properly  called  socialism^ 
whether  it  appears  in  the  sliape  of  not  entirely 
breaking  with  present  society,  like  the  half-way 
scheme  of  Lassalle,  or  in  getting  complete  con- 
trol of  society,  on  the  scheme  of  the  ablest  of 
those  who  would  overturn  society,  like  the  accom- 
plished, determined  veteran,  Karl  Marx.  This 
system,  in  the  construction  of  which  Germans 
have  been  most  active,  and  which  seems  likely  to 


COMMUNISM  AND  SOCIALISM. 


7 


throw  all  others  into  the  shade,  which  threatens 
to  control  the  working-classes  everywhere,  and 
‘^with  fear  of  change  perplexes  monarchs,”  we 
shall  call  socialism^  without  absolutely  confining 
ourselves  to  this  terijo^  inasmuch  as  under  it  the 
great  commiuM^f^the  state — now  becomes  the 
only  subject  of  property. 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  communism  does  not 
really  give  up  the  notion  of  property  either 
within  the  state,  or  over  against  all  persons 
and  communities  which  are  outside  of  its  pale : 
it  also  expressly  admits  the  rightful  exist- 
ence of  private  property  by  receiving  from  pri- 
vate individuals,  and  that,  in  the  way  of  free 
gift,  what  before  was  their  own ; by  maintaining 
suits  to  defend  such  property,  when  once  received  ; 
by  transactions  of  bargain  and  sale  with  persons 
beyond  their  borders,  and,  in  some  cases,  by  re- 
turning such  property  to  its  former  owner  when 
he  leaves  a community.  Socialism^  on  the  other 
hand,  while  it  may  admit  the  state’s  right  of 
property  over  against  another  state,  does  away 
with  all  ownership,  on  the  part  of  members 
of  the  state,  of  things  that  do  not  perish  in  the 
using,  or  of  their  own  labor  in  creating  material 
products.  Its  first  and  last  policy  is  to  prevent 
the  acquisition  or  exclusive  use  of  capital,  by  any 
person  or  association  imder  the  control  of  the  state, 
with  the  exception,  perhaps,  of  articles  of  luxury 
or  enjoyment  procured  by  the  savings  of  wages. 


8 


DEFINITION  AND  NATURE  OF 


No  savings  can  give  rise  to  what  is  properly  called 
capital,  or  means  of  production  in  private  hands. 

Communities  have  been  established  on  various 
principles.  The  individuals  that  compose  them 
enter  voluntarily  into  association  with  others; 
and  the  societies  themselves  determine,  witliin 
certain  limits,  which  are  subject  to  the  control  of 
public  law,  what  their  rules  and  the  relations  of 
members  shall  be.  Thus  the  question  of  the  en- 
tire surrender  of  property  to  the  community  by 
the  entering  member  would  naturally  be  a car- 
dinal one,  yet,  state  law  might  restrain  him  from 
so  acting.  The  various  questions  relating  to  mar- 
riage and  celibacy,  to  the  employments  of  the 
grown-up  members,  to  the  forms  of  social  union, 
to  religious  worship,  if  they  have  any,  to  the 
government  of  the  society  and  the  management 
of  its  property,  are  all  laid  down  by  general  agree- 
ment pt  first,  and  may  be  altered  unless  the  con- 
stitutions forbid.  The  reasons  for  entering  such 
communities  are  various.  Some  of  them,  being 
strictly  religious  and  confining  membership  to 
one  or  other  of  the  sexes,  would  be  destroyed  in 
their  essence,  and  probably  their  property  be  es- 
cheated, by  departing  from  this  idea.  Others  may 
be  founded  on  religious  grounds  or  for  social  rea- 
sons, may  establish  or  abolish  celibacy,  and  extin- 
guish or  tolerate  existing  family  relations.  The 
control,  again,  of  the  officers  over  the  members 
may  be  strict  or  loose. 


unless  they  should  be  judged  to  contaiii 
lawful  element.  Thus  Cabet  put  his  own  plan 
the  proof  in  the  United  States.  Fourier’s  pha- 
lansteries might  be  established  as  experiments  to 
teach  the  state  what  attitude  it  ought  to  take  in 
regard  to  them,  and  something  like  them  has  been 
attempted  outside  of  France.  Ateliers,  after  the 
plan  of  JfTniis  Blanc’s  organization  of  labor,  were 
actually  tried  by  one  of  the  French  governments. 
These  schemes  were  intended  for  the  reform  of 
society,  and  it  might  be  said  that  a failure  in  a 
single  case,  when  society  w^as  all  on  the  other  side, 
was  no  real  proof  that  in  other  circumstances  such 
plans  might  not  be  successful. 

There  may  also  be  men  who  oppose  property 
and  communism  at  once ; who  are  called  commu- 
nists with  no  good  will  of  their  own.  Such  was 
Pierre  Joseph  Proudhon,  whose  well-known  motto, 
borrowed  from  Brissot  de  Warville,  was,  La  jyro- 
jprieU  dest  le  an  expression  of  principle,  by 
the  way,  which  Brissot  gave  up  before  he  was 
guillotined.  Proudhon’s  owm  opinions  are  known 
from  passages  in  his  first  memoir  on  property: 
we  give  them  in  English  in  Mr.  Benjamin  R. 
Tucker’s  translation,  p.  259 : 

“ I ought  not  to  conceal  the  fact  that  property 


constitution  for  society  and  for  the  state 
U.C  once.  It  is  therefore,  when  viewed  on  one 
side,  far  more  imperious  and  widesweeping  than 
communism.  It  is  so  opposed  to  the  present 
order  of  society  that  it  must  transform  and  over- 
turn, either  by  the  peaceable  consent  of  the  mass 
of  men  in  a state,  and  by  thus  getting  possession 
of  a state’s  principal  resources  (whiclTH/ entirely 
incredible),  or  by  revolutionizing  society.  , On  the 
other  hand,  having  got  sucli  control,  it  scarcely  has 
had  in  view,  as  yet,  so  great  a change  and  separa- 
tion from  the  society  of  the  present,  in  some  re- 
spects, as  some  of  the  communities,  which  are  pro- 
tected by  states,  have  introduced  on  the  small  scale. 
Give  it  the  control  over  capital,  and  it  may  leave 
marriage,  in  a measure  education,  and  the  choice 
of  religion,  free  to  the  people  which  it  has  re- 
organized. 

Such  would  pure  socialism  be ; but  the  theory 
may  be  so  modified,  either  to  secure  an  improve- 
ment on  society  as  it  is,  or  to  provide  for  an 
easier  transition  to  an  unmixed  socialism  of  the 
future,  that  it  will  be  important  to  take  into  view 
such  departm’es  in  theory  from  the  strict  idea  of 
the  system,  if  any  such  there  be. 

The  later  French  systems  of  social  change,  as 


COMMUNISM  AND  SOCIALISM. 


11 


and  communism  have  been  considered  always  tlie 
only  possible  forms  of  society.  This  deplorable 
error  has  been  the  life  of  property.  The  disad- 
vantages of  communism  are  so  obvious  that  its 
critics  have  never  needed  to  employ  much  elo- 
quence to  thoroughly  disgust  men  with  it.  The 
irreparability  of  the  injustice  which  it  causes,  the 
violence  which  it  does  to  attractions  and  repul- 
sions, the  yoke  of  iron  which  it  fastens  on  the 
will,  the  moral  torture  to  which  it  subjects  the 
conscience,  the  debilitating  effect  which  it  has 
upon  society,  and,  to  sum  it  all  up,  the  pious  and 
stupid  uniformity  which  it  enforces  upon  the 
free,  active,  reasoning,  unsubmissive  personality 
of  man,  have  shocked  common  sense  and  con- 
demned communism  by  an  irreversible  decree.” 

And  in  another  place  he  indulges  himself  in  a 
similar  strain  (p.  261) : Communism  is  inequal- 

ity, but  not  as  property  is.  Property  is  the  ex- 
ploitation of  the  weak  by  the  strong.  Commu- 
nism is  the  exploitation  of  the  strong  by  the  weak. 
In  property,  inequality  of  conditions  is  the  result 
of  force,  under  whatever  name  it  be  disguised — 
physical  and  mental  force  ; force  of  events,  chance, 
fortune  ; force  of  accumulated  property,  etc.  In 
communism,  inequality  springs  from  placing 
mediocrity  on  a level  with  excellence.  This  dam- 
aging equation  is  repellant  to  the  conscience,  and 
causes  merit  to  complain ; for,  although  it  may 
be  the  duty  of  the  strong  to  aid  the  weak,  they 


12 


DEFINITION  AND  NATURE  OF 


prefer  to  do  it  out  of  generosity.  They  never 
will  endure  a comparison.  Give  them  equal  op- 
portunities of  labor  and  equal  wages,  but  never 
allow  their  jealousy  to  be  awakened  by  mutual 
suspicion  of  unfaithfulness  in  the  performance  of 
a common  task.” 

This  is  enough  to  show  that  he  is  no  commu- 
nist, although  he  holds  a doctrine  which  commu- 
nists also  hold.  What  his  opinions  on  other  cog- 
nate topics  are,  this  is  not  the  place  to  set  forth. 

Another  view  of  communism  and  socialism  in 
their  resemblances  and  differences,  is  said  in  a 
public  journal  to  have  been  lately  given  by  a 
brilliant  lecturer,  to  which  we  must  take  excep- 
tions. He  defines  the  former  of  the  two  to  be  the 
doing  away  with  inheritance,  the  family,  nation- 
ality, religion,  and  property ; socialism  to  be  the 
doing  away  with  the  first  four  only.  This  is  clear 
and  distinct — as  clear  as  the  doing  away  with  the 
five  points  of  Calvinism  to  describe  Arminian- 
ism ; but  we  are  compelled  to  make  objections  to 
the  justness  of  the  distinction.  And  first,  as  for 
inheritancey  why  put  it  at  the  beginning,  when,  if 
there  is  no  property,  there  is  nothing  to  inherit. 
As  for  thefamilyy  as  yet  no  social  bodies  or  asso- 
ciations,, that  we  know  of,  which  are  widespread 
and  ramified,  have  in  modern  times  dared  to  at- 
tack the  family.  Jager,  one  of  the  best  writers 
on  socialism,  asserts  expressly  that  “ modern  so- 
cialism, through  those  whom  it  has  called  upon  as 


co:\imi;nism  and  socialism. 


13 


its  representatives,  lias  never  officially  expressed 
itself  concerning  marriage ; ” altliongli  he  thinks 
that  its  principles  tend  in  the  direction  of  loosen- 
ing the  marriage  tie.  Isext,  as  to  nathnality^  it 
would  be  correct  to  say  that  some  forms  of  this 
doctrine  are  international,  while  others  are  na- 
tional ; but  none  expect,  nor,  so  far  as  we  are  in- 
formed, seek  to  do  away  with  the  state.  On  the 
contrary,  the  social  state  would  have  all  the  pow- 
ers now  distributed  through  society  in  their  high- 
est potence.  So  of  religion^  that  the  principal 
supporters  of  socialism  are  atheists  or  pantheists 
is  undoubted ; and  yet  the  theory  has  not  hitherto 
absorbed  atheism  into  its  organism.  So  much  is 
true  that  it  discards  altogether  any  public  or  state 
religion,  and  regards  religious  faith  as  a matter 
of  private  conviction,  to  be  professed  by  individ- 
uals ; that  in  the  main  it  repels  Christian  believ- 
ers from  its  pale  by  its  godless  tendencies ; but 
yet  there  have  not  been  wanting  in  this  age  Chris- 
tians who  have  tried  to  unite  it  with  their  holiest 
convictions.  Finally,  as  to  property ^ the  doing 
away  of  private  property  is  common  to  both  com- 
munism and  socialism,  and,  in  fact,  there  is  no 
theory  of  socialism  thouglit  of  at  present,  ‘ so  far 
as  we  know,  in  which  questions  of  property  do 
not  occupy  the  first  place  and  the  expropriation  ” 
of  the  holders  of  property  does  not  really  lie  at  the 
foundation  of  the  system  or  systems.  In  proof  of 
what  we  say,  we  will  give  here  a definition  of  social- 


14 


DEFINITION  AND  NATURE  OF 


ism,  translated  as  literally  as  perspicuity  will  per- 
mit, from  a work  of  a German  political  econo- 
mist of  no  mean  reputation:  ^‘The  politico- 
economical  quintessence  of  the  socialistic  pro- 
gramme,” says  he,  the  proper  aim  of  the  inter- 
national movement,  is  as  follows : the  replacement 
of  private  capital  (that  is,  of  the  speculative,  pri- 
vate method  of  production,  which  depends  only 
on  free  competition)  by  ^ collective  capital  ’ — that 
is,  by  a method  of  production  which,  upon  the 
basis  of  the  collective  property  of  the  sum  of  all 
the  members  of  the  society  in  the  means  of  pro- 
duction, seeks  to  carry  on  a unitary  (social,  ^ col- 
lective’) organization  of  national  work.”  Here 
he  includes  in  his  first  sentence  both  what  is  called 
the  socialistic  and  the  international  movements, 
and  finds  their  end  in  the  substitution  of  collective 
for  private  capital,  using  the  collective  property 
of  the  entire  community  so  as  to  destroy  all  con- 
currence, and  to  effect  a unitary  organization  of 
the  work  and,  therefore,  of  the  production  of  the 
whole  nation.  So  that,  if  Schaeffie  understands 
the  movements  in  which  Marx  and  Lassalle  have 
been  so  prominent,  our  lecturer,  to  whom  we  le- 
fei-red,  misunderstands  it. 

Thus  the  essence  of  both  socialism  and  commu- 
nism lies  in  the  abolition  of  private  property, 
either  entirely  or  to  such  an  extent  that  the  pri- 
vate person  ceases  to  have  any  control  over  it  and 
the  state  takes  his  place.  This  is  especially  true 


COMMUNISM  AND  SOCIALISM. 


15 


of  everything  by  which  human  labor  is  assisted  in 
production — that  is,  it  is  true  of  all  machinery 
and  of  the  soil.  And  thus  all  products  are  cre- 
ated under  the  supervision  of  the  state,  and  pass 
over,  or  a portion  of  them  passes  over,  to  individ- 
ual workmen,  as  their  wages  for  their  work. 

We  add  one  remark  tending  to  help  the  under- 
standing of  the  subject  at  this  stage  of  our  prog- 
ress. Men  will  not  stop  in  a theory  which  they 
hope  to  reduce  to  practice  without  looking  for- 
ward, and,  as  it  were,  prophesying  wdiat  shall  be, 
when  so  immense  a change  as  the  abandonment 
of  private  property  shall  have  passed  over  the 
world.  But  many  crude  ideas  must  be  mingled 
in  the  speculations  on  such  a subject.  These 
speculations  ought  not  to  be  confounded  with  the 
vagaries  and  chimeras  of  fervent  minds.  There 
never  has  been  (we  trust  there  never  will  be)  any 
system  of  society  answering  in  its  principles  and 
the  vastness  of  its  results  to  the  theories  and  plans 
of  socialism.  This  very  vastness  of  the  plan 
stimulates  the  imagination  and  makes  possibilities 
seem  real  to  dreamers.  But  all  these  must  not 
be  imputed  to  the  scheme  of  society,  as  the  sober- 
est thinkers  of  the  sect  conceive  of  it.  We  may 
show  necessary  results,  we  may  show  probable  re- 
sults in  opposing,  just  as  others  may  do  in  advo- 
cating such  untried  measures.  But  we  must  not 
call  it  socialism  when  unpractical  dreamers  pro- 
pose something  in  the  way  of  promoting  their 


1C 


DEFINITION  AND  NATURE  OF 


hopes  which  soberer  men  of  the  sect  pronounce 
impossibleo  If  a hierschenJc  reviles  the  wealthy 
over  his  lager,  and  arouses  the  passions  of  the  la- 
borers who  spend  their  money  at  his  counter 
against  the  hourgeoisie^  another  voice  comes  from 
thoughtful  socialists,  who  profess  to  find  the  evils 
of  society  in  the  capital  accumulated  in  a few 
hands,  and  would  therefore  make  a sweeping  rev- 
olution by  abolishing  private  capital.  It  is  these 
theorists  who  are  most  to  be  dreaded. 

II. 

We  have  defined  communism  and  socialism  to 
be  in  their  essence  the  substitution  of  common,^  or 
public,  or  “ collective  ” property  for  private  prop- 
erty ; that  the  state  or  the  community  is  made  the 
proprietor  of  all  or  of  the  principal  means  of  pro- 
duction and  of  existing  products — including,  of 
course,  the  soil  and  whatever  comes  from  it — in- 
stead of  the  private  person  or  the  association  of 
private  persons,  uniting  or  separating  by  free  con- 
sent. The  consequences  of  such  a complete  over- 
turn in  the  relations  of  individuals  to  production 
Ave  cannot  yet  fitly  consider.  It  is  more  impor- 
tant at  this  stage  of  our  inquiries  to  try  to  find  out 
whether  there  are  not  some  subdivisions  of  com- 
munism, and  thus  to  put  ourselves  on  our  guard 
against  confounding  together  forms  of  society 
which  differ  in  important  respects. 


COMMUNISM  AND  SOCIALISM. 


17 


1.  But,  first  of  all,  the  definition  given  above 
needs  to  be  defended  at  one  point.  Admitting 
its  truth,  must  we  not  admit  also  that  partnerships 
in  the  freest  society  are  a kind  of  common  life, 
and  do  they  not  presuppose  a common  property  ? 
The  answer  is,  that  some  forms  of  communistic 
society  do  resemble  some  forms  of  partnerships ; 
but  that  there  are  essential  differences  between 
the  two.  One  is,  that  partnership  is  a limited 
form  of  doing  business  which  a single  person,  if 
he  had  the  capital  and  ability,  could  do  equally 
well.  There  is  also  nothing  political  about  it. 
It  is  a creature  of  the  state,  and  need  not  inter- 
fere with  any  of  the  state’s  powers.  But  the 
community,  even  on  a small  scale,  cannot  fail  to 
obstruct  the  state  in  its  proper  office.  For  in- 
stance, it  may  control  the  family  system,  one  de- 
partment of  private  rights  for  the  protection  and 
free  exercise  of  which  states  may  be  said  to  exist. 
Another  difference  is,  that  partnership  is  purely 
voluntary,  a creature  of  law,  generally  temporary 
and  terminable  at  will,  without  any  intention,  for 
the  most  part,  of  continuing  its  own  existence  in- 
definitely, and  with  no  control  of  the  firm  over 
the  conduct  of  the  single  partners,  except  so  far 
as  is  necessary  for  prosecuting  the  business. 

Still  more  resemblance  does  a community  of 
slaves  or  serfs  imder  a master  bear  to  the  com- 
munities of  which  we  here  speak.  In  the  system 
of  serfage  the  laborers  are  by  law  or  usage  perma- 


18 


DEFINITION  AND  NATURE  OF 


iiently  connected  with  the  soil.  They  cannot  le- 
gally remove  from  it,  or  marry,  or  dispose  of  their 
crops  or  productions  without  the  land-owner’s  con- 
, sent.  He  may  even  have  political  rights  over 
them,  united  with  some  of  the  rights  he  can  exer- 
cise over  slaves.  The  community  may  be  so  far 
isolated  that  the  serf  may  have  no  uniting  bond 
to  the  body  politic  except  through  his  master. 
But  here  the  property  is  all  vested  in  the  master, 
and  can  for  the  most  part  be  alienated  by  him, 
or  may  be  taken  from  him  for  political  offences. 
In  the  system  of  slavery  the  property  of  the  mas- 
ter includes  the  slave  and  his  children,  as  well  as 
the  soil ; and  the  state,  while  the  system  lasts,  in- 
terferes only  on  the  ground  of  humanity. 

The  Spartan  commonvrealth  had  not  only  a sys- 
tem of  serfage,  under  which  the  state  was  the  ulti- 
mate proprietor ; but  a division  of  land  also  to  the 
original  members  of  the  body  politic  in  equal  por- 
tions, which  at  first  they  could  not  alienate.  Be- 
sides this,  the  men  had  common  meals  as  long  as 
each  member  of  a club  could  contribute  his  share 
of  the  expenses.  There  was  also  great  looseness 
in  regard  to  the  marriage  relation.  But  the  indi- 
vidual Spartan  became  free  at  length  to  alienate 
his  lands  in  his  lifetime  or  by  will ; so  that  before 
the  time  of  Aristotle  vast  inequalities  existed  in 
the  estates,  and  the  whole  soil  came  into  the  hands 
of  a few  proprietors.  This  was  in  the  end  any- 
thing but  commimism. 


COMMUNISM  AND  SOCIALISM. 


19 


But,  passing  on  from  this  point,  we  come  to 
the  more  important  one  of  the  different  forms  of 
communities.  Here  we  notice  first  those  early 
societies  which  were  at  an  early  period  developed 
out  of  the  family  and  consisted  of  blood-relatives. 
These  communities  were  germs  of  tribes  and  ex- 
pansions of  the  family.  Within  them  crimes 
were  punished  and  rights  secured  in  a rude  way ; 
but  no  right  of  property  as  between  the  members 
was  very  definitely  settled,  wdiile,  as  far  as  a simi- 
lar neigliboring  community  was  concerned,  the 
possessions  of  the  community  were  defended  by 
force.  Land  for  the  purposes  of  cultivation  had 
no  value.  Products  there  were  next  to  none,  and 
still  less  did  division  of  labor  exist.  The  family 
was,  so  to  speak,  held  in  solution  in  the  great  fam- 
ily or  community.  We  cannot  afford  to  go  fur- 
ther into  the  details  of  these  early  institutions, 
which  have  been  investigated  by  Bachofen,  Mc- 
Lennan, Lubbock,  Morgan,  Girard-Teulon,  and 
others.  Nor  can  we  more  than  mention  the  later 
forms  which  appear  in  several  parts  of  the  world 
where  the  lands  within  a hundred^  or  other  small 
districts,  or  at  least  meadow-lands  and  forests, 
have  been  held  in  common  even  until  modern 
times ; and  where  for  a long  period  the  plough- 
lands were  exchanged  among  the  inhabitants  from 
year  to  year.  For  communities  under  these  forms 
Sir  Henry  S.  Maine,  Laveleye,  and  others  must  be 
consulted.  In  these,  as  well  as  in  the  communi- 


20 


DEFINITION  AND  NATUIiE  OF 


ties  first  mentioned,  the  starting-point  was  the 
family.  In  the  first  form  the  necessity  of  self- 
defence  must  have  been  the  main  cause  of  the 
common  life  in  contiguous  settlements.  In  the 
second,  the  village  communities  being  a part  of 
a tribe  or  union,  and  being  now  devoted  to  agri- 
culture, as  well  as  pasturage,  houses  and  lands  ad- 
joining became  personal  property ; although  there 
was  a time  in  some  races  when  these  were  ex- 
changed from  year  to  year.  As  soon,  then,  as 
houses  and  lands  had  a value,  private  property  to 
a very  great  extent  was  recognized  all  over  the 
world. 

These  early  communities  teach  us  little.  The 
second  communistic  form  is  that  which  has  arisen 
within  the  state^  whenever,  for  various  reasons, 
small  bodies  of  men  make  a common  stock  and 
live  a life  severed  from  the  rest  of  the  society. 
This  is  not  an  unfrequent  phenomenon  in  the 
history  of  mankind.  The  most  common  cause 
for  their  existence  has  been  either  the  ascetic,  or 
in  some  way  the  religious  principle,  whether  it 
appears  in  the  contemplative  life  of  the  Buddhist 
mendicant  order,  in  the  institutions  of  the  Es- 
senes,  and  among  the  various  kinds  of  Christian 
monks;  or  in  a more  fanatical  form,  as  among 
the  Anabaptists  under  John  of  Leyden ; or  in  as- 
sociations of  dreamers  for  establishing  societies 
after  a certain  idea,  like  Cabet’s  colou}^  in  Texas ; 
or  for  industrial  purposes,  like  that  of  Owen, 


COMMUNISM  AND  SOCIALISM. 


21 


Many  of  these  are  full  of  interest,  and  would  re- 
ward  study.  Some  few  of  them  may  be  noticed 
hereafter. 

It  is  to  be  observed,  however,  that  all  of  these 
may  form  parts  of  states,  just  as  towns  and  villages 
do,  except  that  they  are  not  separate  political 
communities.  There  never  has  been  a state  con- 
sisting of  S2ich  communities^  and  of  such  only. 
The  state  protects  them  and  their  property,  and 
society  stands  aloof  from  them,  as  they  stand 
aloof  from  Society.  It  is  impossible  that  in  such 
a position  they  should  not  receive  ideas  from  the 
larger  community  under  whose  shadow  they  live, 
Hence,  all  conclusions  from  their  conduct  and 
history  are  subject  to  some  doubt.  We  may 
always  ask  whether  such  communities  have  acted 
out  their  genuine  nature ; whether  the  world  out* 
side  of  their  pale  has  not  repressed  some  evil, 
has  not  prevented  their  principles  from  running 
to  an  extreme,  and  infused  some  good  into  them. 
Sometimes,  also,  they  have  lasted  so  short  a time 
that  no  sure  judgment  can  be  formed  concerning 
what  fruit  they  would  bear  if  time  were  given 
them. 

A third  communistic  form  would  be  that  of  a 
comnmnistic  or  socialistic  state^  with  all  power 
put  into  the  hands  of  the  upturners  of  existing 
society  to  carry  out  their  principles  as  they 
wished.  But,  unfortunately  for  mankind  in  the 
future,  there  have  been  no  such  communities  in 


22  DEFINITION  AND  NATURE  OF 

the  past.  History  has  no  voice  to  utter  concern- 
ing communistic  states.  That  awful  thing,  pri- 
vate property,  has  lorded  it  since  a little  after  the 
era  of  the  cave-dwellers  until  now.  And  just  in 
this  consists  the  power  and  plausibility  of  social- 
ism. They  can  tell  the  operative  that,  if  only  the 
theory  is  made  practical,  his  fortune  will  be  made ; 
or,  as  Mr.  Most,  who  has  been  a member  of  the 
German  Parliament,  tells  them,  a man  will  need 
only  to  work  ten  years,  from  his  eighteenth  to 
his  twenty-eighth  year,  to  be  supported  by  the 
socialistic  state  for  the  rest  of  his  life. 

Thus  we  see  that  another  division  can  be  made 
for  practical  uses,  between  communistic  forms 
which  hawe  heen  tested  hy  experience^  and  those 
that  exist  as  mere  theories.  These  latter  are  of 
incomparably  vaster  importance  than  all  the 
others  that  have  been  thought  of  since  the  begin- 
ning of  the  creation.  They  have  also  this  pecu- 
liarity, that,  whilst  the  old  experiments  proceeded 
from  some  philosophical  or  religious  conviction, 
which  adds  dignity  and  worth  to  them,  the  new 
experiments,  which  amount  to  an  absolute  over- 
throw of  all  existing  political  institutions,  are  ap- 
plications chiefly  of  principles  of  political  econ- 
omy, which,  to  say  the  least,  are  not  so  certain  of 
success  as  to  justify  a complete  revolution. 

But  we  are  anticipating  wliat  we  might  better 
say  by  and  by.  At  present  we  must  look  at  the 
history  and  results  of  the  communistic  system  as 


COMMUNISM  AND  SOCIALISM. 

it  has  shown  itself  by  actual  experiment ; then  at 
the  theories  and  plans  for  a new  order  of  things, 
which  have  not  been  submitted  to  trial.  Much  of 
this  matter  we  may  lightly  pass  over.  It  will 
then  be  necessary  to  examine  far  more  fully  the 
schemes  which  are  now  agitating  the  world. 


24  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 


CHAPTEE  IL 

SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

I. 

BUDDHIST  MONKS — ESSENES—  TIIERAPEUT^. 

We  have  already  remarked  that  there  is  an 
abundance  of  materials  furnished  to  us  by  history, 
for  showing  the  nature  and  workings  of  small 
societies,  united  in  a common  life  by  some  one 
principle  or  motive.  A large  number  of  these 
societies  were  formed  by  persons  of  the  ascetic 
or  contemplative  sort,  who  expected  some  great 
good,  especially  some  religious  good,  from  seclu- 
sion. In  the  order  of  time  the  anchorite  or  her- 
mit was  earlier  than  the  community  of  monks. 
If  seclusion  fi’orn  the  corruptions  of  the  world,  with 
opportunity  for  contemplation  and  religious  exer- 
cises, could  be  united  to  help  derived  from  others 
of  a like  spirit — the  advantages  of  solitude,  and 
those  of  a society  separated  from  the  unthinking 
mass  of  men,  would  be  equally  secured;  and  a 
certain  description  of  persons  who  had  a natural 
turn  for  solitude,  or  expected  to  purify  their  souls 


SMALLER  COMIVIUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  25 


by  contemplation,  or  were  soured  by  disappoint- 
ments, or  disgusted  with  ordinary  life,  would  here 
find  some  solace  together. 

These  comrnmiities  began  extensively  in  the 
free  union  of  anchorites,  who  united  by  and  by, 
with  equal  freedom,  in  associations  where  rules 
and  promises  or  vows  were  found  necessary,  in 
order  that  the  common  good  might  be  promoted. 
As  it  regarded  supplies  for  the  bodily  wants, 
either  soliciting  alms  from  others  or  industry 
within  the  commimities  themselves  was  the  origi- 
nal means  by  which  these  needs  were  met.  The 
demands  made  on  others  might  be  very  small, 
for  the  earliest  plan  was  to  live  within  the  nar- 
rowest bounds  of  human  necessities ; and,  more- 
over, an  industrious  life  might  seem  to  be  incon- 
sistent with  the  great  spiritual  end  which  the 
communities  had  in  view.  By  and  by,  in  some 
countries,  the  life  of  self-denial  and  of  religious 
contemplation  and  prayer,  unattainable  by  the 
mass  of  men,  would  naturally  cause  these  monks 
to  be  revered ; permanent  funds  would  be  given 
to  them,  houses  would  be  provided  for  their  shel- 
ter, and  orders  would  bring  together  in  different 
parts,  where  the  same  religion  was  professed, 
great  numbers  who  were  governed  by  the  same 
rule. 

It  is  easy  to  see  that  the  fundamental  rules 
were  pointed  out  by  refiection  on  human  nature 
and  by  experience  of  the  evil  that  is  in  the  world. 

2 


2G  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

There  are  two  very  strong  desires  in  man — that 
of  wealth  or  the  means  of  self-gratification,  and 
the  sexual  instinct.  Whatever  end  be  proposed 
in  a life  remote  from  the  w^orld,  whether  it  be 
the  extinction  of  desire,  or  closer  communion 
with  God,  or  escape  from  the  corruption  that  is 
in  the  world  through  lust,  or  a longing  for  seren- 
ity and  peace  of  soul,  or  the  realization  of  an  idea 
of  virtue  which  men  in  society  cannot  well  reach : 
these  two  classes  of  desire  are  the  principal  ones 
to  be  held  in  restraint,  or,  if  possible,  extinguish- 
ed ; these  are  the  main  tyrants,  in  a corrupt  so- 
ciety especially,  which  enslave  the  soul.  Hence 
the  vows  or,  at  least,  the  rules  of  chastity  and 
poverty  are  universal,  in  all  the  forms  of  com- 
mon life  to  which  we  here  have  reference ; and 
they  were  taken  even  by  orders  or  bodies  of 
priests  or  priestesses  who  did  not  constitute  com- 
munities. The  vow  of  obedience  also  to  a su- 
perior, elected  by  the  members  of  the  community 
or  in  some  other  way  set  over  them,  was  generally 
but  not  always  required. 

Among  these  communities  a very  early  order 
was  that  of  the  Buddhist  monks,  who  were  at 
first  simply  the  mendicants  whom  Gautama  gath- 
ered around  him  in  his  solitude.  These  were  at 
the  outset  to  have  nothing  but  their  rags,  their 
begging-bowl,  a razor,  a needle,  and  a water- 
strainer  ; but  ere  long,  like  the  monks  in  Chris- 
tian convents,  they  could  as  a body  possess  books, 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  27 


lands,  and  houses,  given  to  them  by  private  muni^ 
ficence.  Houses  were  almost  necessary  in  the 
rainy  season.  The  vows  they  took  upon  them- 
selves were  poverty  and  chastity — the  latter  so 
strictly  guarded  that  it  was  held  to  be  unlawful 
even  to  touch  a woman,  however  nearly  related. 
Obedience  to  a superior  in  the  convent  or  com- 
munity consisted  in  conformity  rather  to  the 
rules  of  the  order  than  to  a superior’s  bidding. 
When  the  vow  or  the  rules  are  violated,  a mem- 
ber may  be  expelled  from  the  body,  or  may  have 
some  penance  imposed  on  him  upon  his  confes- 
sion of  his  offence.  Mr.  Rhys  Davids  says  that 
‘^charges  may  be  brought  against  a monk  for 
breach  of  the  ordinances  laid  down  in  the  Pitakas 
[or  sacred  books],  and  must  be  examined  by  a 
chapter;  but  no  one  can  change  or  add  to  the 
existing  law  or  claim  obedience  from  any  novice.” 

The  originating  motive  for  Buddhism  in  the 
mind  of  Gautama  or  Buddha  and  its  success  are 
due  especially  to  the  weight  with  which  transmi- 
gration pressed  on  the  Indian  mind.  Successive 
lives  depended  for  their  condition  on  the  sins  and 
virtues  of  a previous  life ; but  all  life  was  unreal- 
ity and  illusion,  the  complete  escape  from  which 
was  the  highest  good.  Such  escape  could  be  ef- 
fected only  by  killing  desire,  and  this  extinction 
of  desire  could  be  effected  only  by  meditation  and 
self-denial.  The  reward  was,  that  there  would  be 
no  new  birth ; that  an  end  could  come  to  the 


28  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

illusive  dream  of  existence.  It  is  strange  that 
anchorites,  who  only  meditated  and  supplied  their 
most  absolutely  necessary  wants,  could  spread  a 
religion  which  embraces  more  followers  than  any 
other.  But  the  explanation,  in  part,  at  least,  lies 
first  in  this  doctrine  that  the  new  birth  might  at 
length  come  to  an  end,  and  that  existence  in  a 
world  full  of  illusions  might  give  place  to  nonen- 
tity; next,  in  the  abolition  of  caste — in  other 
words,  in  the  breaking  away  from  the  fundamen- 
tal institutions  of  Brahminism ; then  in  the  mild 
and  benevolent  morality  of  the  founders  of  Bud- 
dhism. The  abolition  of  caste  made  it  possible, 
while  the  reliction  was  in  its  infancv  in  India,  to 
admit  all  men  of  all  castes  into  its  pale  ; and  the 
same  liberty,  together  with  other  causes  given 
above,  made  its  spread  possible  through  surround- 
ing nations.  This  spread  was  due  to  the  mendi- 
cant order,  which  was  not  a caste  or  a body  of 
priests,  but  a simple  fraternity.  Originally,  the 
mendicant  order  was  all  of  Buddhism  that  existed. 
But  wide  expansion  of  such  a kind  of  anchorites 
was  impossible,  in  a world  where  industry  and 
marriage  are  forced  on  the  majority  of  men  by 
the  commands  of  their  nature.  The  Buddhists 
had  to  yield  to  this.  In  converting  men  to  their 
moral  maxims  and  to  freedom  from  caste,  they 
had  to  allow  the  existence  of  a kind  of  laity, 
which  was  not  bound  by  the- rules  of  the  mendi- 
cants. And  what  was,  perhaps,  as  important — 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  29 


when  the  religion,  being  overcome  in  a great 
struggle  with  Brahminism,  w^as  driven  out  of 
India  and  spread  its  doctrine  in  other  countries ; 
the  great  mass  of  the  converted  population,  or 
that  which  venerated  Buddha,  received  the  moral 
precepts  and  fell  under  control  of  the  monks,  was 
left  to  its  superstitions  and  its  old  divinities  and 
spirits  to  a very  considerable  extent.  This  could 
be  done,  because  the  gods  themselves  were  sub- 
ject to  the  same  lav/s  of  existence  with  men,  and 
because  in  Buddhism  there  was  no  God  in  our 
sense  of  the  word,  no  providence,  no  prayer,  noth- 
ing but  atheism. 

The  mendicants,  we  have  seen,  were  at  an  early 
date  allowed  to  possess  houses,  and  formed  close 
settlements  or  social  unions.  In  Thibet,  after  a 
long  struggle,  they  formed  a hierarchy,  with 
wealthy  and  populous  religious  houses,  under  su- 
perintendents, like  the  abbots  of  Ilomanism,  and 
imder  ‘ an  infallible  head,  the  Dalai  Lama,  in 
whom  the  spirit  of  Buddha  or  the  Buddhas  be- 
came incarnate.  Supreme  temporal  power  was 
given  to  him  by  the  Mogul  Emperor  Kubilai 
Khan,  in  the  thirteenth  century ; but  the  destinies 
of  this  impostor  have  varied  since  they  fell  under 
the  control  of  the  Chinese  Government. 

Another  very  different  set  of  communities,  small 
at  their  acme  in  number,  but  remarkable  on  more 
than  one  account,  are  the  Essen es,  who  appeared 
in  Judea  not  long  before  the  birth  of  Christ. 


CO  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

They  are  known  to  ns  from  the  accounts  which 
Philo  the  Jew,  and  Josephus  have  given  in  their 
wwks.  Of  their  origin,  their  opinions,  and  their 
relation  to  Jewish  opinion  and  heathen  sects  we 
intend  to  say  next  to  nothing,  except  that  they 
show  some  influences  derived  from  the  Persian 
religion,  or  Parsism,  and  that  no  connection  what- 
ever can  be  traced  between  them  and  our  Lord  or 
his  apostles.  Those  who  can  follow  the  argu- 
ments of  Dr.  Lightfoot  in  his  commentary  on  the 
Colossians,  will  find  there  the  most  instructive  es- 
say on  this  sect  which  has  hitherto  been  given  to 
the  world. 

The  Essenes  numbered,  according  to  Philo, 
about  four  thousand  in  all,  and  preferred  to  live 
in  villages  rather  than  in  cities,  on  account  of  the 
corruption  of  the  latter.  They  are  spoken  of  by 
Pliny  the  Elder,  wPo  has  a very  imperfect  knowl- 
edge of  them,  as  dwelling  not  far  from  the 
western  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea ; but  apparently 
these  were  scattered  and  remote  from  one  an- 
other. All  authorities  agree  that  they  held  to 
community  of  goods  and  of  products  of  the  in- 
dustry of  each  member  of  the  society;  but  it 
w^ould  seem  that  they  had  no  common  bond  imit- 
ing  the  several  communities  together.  A treas- 
urer is  spoken  of  by  Josephus  as  taking  care  of 
the  funds  in  each  society,  and  a common  head- 
man was  chosen  by  the  vote  of  the  members  of 
each.  Marriage  w^as  not  in  use  among  them,  not 


8MALLE]a  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  31 


tliat  they  looked  on  it  or  on  inheritance  as  institu- 
tions to  be  abolished,  but  because,  as  Josephus 
says,  they  feared  the  wanton  conduct  and  un- 
faithfulness of  the  female  sex.  Hence,  they  re- 
cruited their  communities  by  adopting  boys  to 
be  trained  up  under  their  rules.  There  was, 
however,  a portion  of  the  Essenes,  the  same  au- 
thor says,  who  differed  in  no  respect  from  the 
rest,  except  that  they  allowed  marriage  in  their 
communities,  for  the  reason  that  those  who  do 
not  marry  cut  off  succession  and  descent,  which 
constitute  the  leading  features  of  life.”  But  they 
subjected  the  women  who  were  to  be  married  to  a 
long  probation,  to  see  whether  they  were  likely  to 
be  fruitful. 

The  distinctive  peculiarities  of  the  Essenes,  as 
it  respects  worship,  were  very  great  veneration 
for  the  Sabbath,  abstinence  from  sacrifices  at  the 
temple, — although  they  sent  offerings  thither, — 
and  a certain  kind  of  reverence  for  the  sun,  which 
came  near  to  idolatry.  They  had  prophetic  per- 
sons, and,  it  is  said,  magic  arts  among  them. 
They  were  constant  and  particular  in  their  ablu- 
tions. As  a mild  sect,  more  contemplative  than 
fanatical,  not  taking  pains  to  propagate  their  doc- 
trines, but  rather  living  by  themselves,  and  yet 
kind  to  strangers,  they  remind  one  of  the  Shaker 
communities  in  the  United  States,  who,  when 
most  prosperous,  have  not  differed  greatly  in  num- 
ber from  Philo’s  estimate  of  the  Essenes. 


32  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

Very  similar  to  the  Essenes  were  the  Thera- 
peutae,  whom  Philo  the  Jew,  in  his  brief  essay  on 
the  contemplative  life,  speaks  of  as  being  scat- 
tered over  all  the  districts  of  Egypt.  They  must 
have  been  Jews,  who  were  under  the  influence  of 
Platonism,  and,  like  Philo  himself,  to  some  ex- 
tent, of  Oriental  philosophy.  He  describes  a set- 
tlement on  the  sea-coast,  near  Alexandria,  as  com- 
posed of  men  and  women  who  had  given  up  theii 
property  and  left  their  kindred  for  the  purpose 
‘‘  of  avoiding  unprofltable  intercourse  with’  per^ 
sons  of  characters  and  habits  unlike  their  own.” 
They  live  in  scattered  houses,  he  says,  but  near 
enough  to  each  other  for  defence  against  robbers. 
They  spend  their  time,  from  the  morning  prayer 
at  sunrise  until  the  evening  prayer  at  sunset,  in 
meditation  and  study  of  ancient  books,  oracles  of 
prophets,  and  the  like.  Their  meals  are  nothing 
but  bread  and  salt.  They  hold  no  slaves,  think- 
ing slavery  to  be  contrary  to  nature.  In  each 
house  is  a chapel  or  sanctuary,  where  they  spend 
the  six  days  in  meditation  ; but  on  the  Sabbath 
they  meet  in  an  apartment  provided  wdth  a low 
wall  running  through  its  length,  in  order  to  keep 
the  females  from  observation.  In  their  solemn 
feasts  the  singing  of  sacred  lijunns  seems  to  have 
been  the  principal  act  of  worship.  Hymns  are 
struck  up  by  one  and  another,  in  the  choral  parts 
and  refrains  of  which  both  sexes  join.  The  un- 
leavened bread,  together  with  salt  and  hyssop,  is 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  33 


brought  in  on  a table  representing,  it  would  seem, 
that  table  where  the  shew-bread  was  placed  in  the 
temple,  of  which  they  partake.  After  this  a sacred 
vigil  is  kept,  in  memory  of  the  passage  through 
the  Red  Sea.  Hymns  follow,  in  which  the  men 
and  women  form  choirs,  first  apart  and  then  to- 
gether. This  lasts  until  sunrise,  when  they  stretch 
forth  their  hands,  pray  for  prosperity,  truth,  and 
sharpness  of  intellectual  vision,”  and  then  part. 

These  Therajpeiitm  differ  from  the  Essenes  in 
allowing  both  sexes  to  live  in  the  same  communi- 
ties, although  without  marriage  and  in  a strictly 
abstemious  and  ascetic  life.  Of  industry  pursued 
in  their  settlements  Philo  says  nothing.  They 
were,  doubtless,  called  forth  by  much  the  same 
causes  which  gave  rise  to  the  Essenes.  The  time 
of  their  origin  is  unknown ; but  they  must  have 
been  such  as  Philo  describes  them  long  before 
Christ  began  his  ministry. 

11. 

THE  CHRISTIAN  MONASTIC  SYSTEM. 

The  examples  thus  far  given,  of  societies  con- 
structed on  the  communistic  plan  within  the  state, 
show  the  power  of  religious  opinions  and  ideas  to 
bring  men  into  societies  separate  from  the  masses 
of  men  around  them,  and  to  do  this  with  no  po- 
litical or  pecuniary  object  in  view.  Our  next 
2* 


34  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

example  is  still  more  remarkable.  The  monastic 
system  of  the  ancient  church,  both  in  the  East 
and  in  the  West,  is  a most  important  chapter  in 
ecclesiastical  history,  on  account  of  its  tenacity  of 
life  and  its  vast  influence  for  good  as  well  as  for 
evil,  and  because  it  could  not  have  grown  up  in  a 
pure,  enlightened  Christian  church.  As  in  pa- 
pacy, so  here  the  seemingly  good  and  inno- 
cent nature  of  the  system  lent  strength  to  false 
principles,  which  had  no  necessary  connection 
with  the  spirit  and  principles  of  the  gospel. 
These  false  principles  took  hold  of  supports  which 
belonged  to  an  age  and  to  its  way  of  thinking,  in 
order  to  construct  institutions  which  have  lasted 
until  this  day;  and  which,  although  they  have 
reached  senile  weakness,  are  still  a strong  if  not 
a chief  power  in  several  decaying  churches. 

A community  of  goods  is  an  essential  feature 
of  all  kinds  of  communism.  What  shall  we  say, 
then,  when  it  is  asserted  that  the  community  of 
goods  in  the  early  Christian  church  at  Jerusa- 
lem, just  after  the  death  of  Christ,  is  a sufficient 
reason  for  the  rise  of  monachism  ? We  say,  first, 
tliat  this  community  was  not  a close^  but  rather  a 
changing  community,  consisting  of  families  obedi- 
ent to  no  law  of  union,  no  vow  or  other  tie  save 
the  fellowship  of  the  gospel.  Again,  it  was  vol- 
untary. No  one  was  obliged  to  sell  his  goods  to 
feed  the  poor ; but,  although  governed  by  a strong 
public  feeling,  was  free  to  follow  what  was  right. 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  35 


While  it  remained  [unsold]  was  it  not  thine 
own ; and  when  it  was  sold,  was  it  not  in  thine 
own  power  ? ’’  is  the  question  of  Peter  to  Ananias. 
Again,  it  was  local.  There  is  no  evidence  that  it 
existed  beyond  Jerusalem.  Among  the  Hebrew 
Christians,  to  whom  James  wrote,  there  were 
great  inequalities  of  property.  Paid,  writing  to 
Timothy,  at  Ephesus,  uses  the  words  Charge 
them  that  are  rich  among  you ; ” and  the  Gentile 
Christians  were  well  enough  off  to  send  their  con- 
tributions to  the  poor  at  Jerusalem.  And,  finally, 
it  was  temporary.  When  there  was  no  centre 
and  capital  any  longer ; when,  we  may  add,  there 
was  no  longer  an  immediate  expectation  of  an 
end  of  the  existing  order  of  things  in  society — it 
turned  into  such  general  charity  as  is  now  called 
forth  by  Christian  love.  Nor  was  a single  life 
thought  to  be  essential  to  the  Christian  profes- 
sion. Paul  led  such  a life ; but  claimed  the  right 
to  have  a wife,  like  Peter  and  other  apostles,  if 
he  thought  it  best.  His  advice  to  the  Christians 
at  Corinth  is  against  seeking  husbands  for  their 
daughters ; yet  this  advice  is  dictated,  in  part,  at 
least,  by  the  present  distress,”  or  the  state  of 
the  times.  In  other  circumstances  he  urges  that 
woman  should  marry,  and  even  that  young  wid- 
ows should  marry  again;  which,  although  al- 
lowed, was  not  approved  even  by  the  heathen 
Romans.  He  makes  it  one  of  the  marks  of  a de- 
parture from  the  faith,  that  the  speakers  of  lies 


3G  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  MTTIIIN  A STATE. 

should  forbid  men  to  marry  and  command  to  ab- 
stain from  meats  (1  Tim.  iv,  2,  3).  And,  to  dwell 
no  longer  on  this  point,  the  same  apostle  finds  an 
apt  symbol  of  the  union  of  man  and  wife  in  the 
union  of  Christ  and  the  church.  From  one  pas- 
sage only  of  the  New  Testament  (Matt.  xix.  12) 
can  we  infer  that  a pure  single  life  is  not  only  al- 
lowable, but  even  praiseworthy,  for  those  who 
can  lead  it  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven’s  sake, 
which  we  certainly  would  be  far  from  denying ; 
and  in  another  (Rev.  xiv.  4)  there  is  praise  of  ab- 
solute purity,  whicli,  however,  cannot  fairly  be 
pressed  as  teaching  the  inferiority  of  a married  to 
a single  life.  Nor  is  there  anywhere  any  encour- 
agement in  the  Christian  Scriptures  to  vows, 
and  to  associations  built  upon  them,  within  the 
church. 

We  may  add  the  remark  that  the  formation  of 
close  unions,  shut  out  from  intercourse  with  the 
world,  meets  with  no  favor  from  the  spirit  and 
institutions  of  the  New  Testament.  The  believ- 
ers were  expected  to  assemble  together,  as  breth- 
ren and  members  of  a common  Master.  They 
w’ere  on  an  equality,  and  there  was  no  esoteric 
class,  no  persons  or  coteries  of  superior  sanctity, 
who  were  to  do  the  praying  for  their  fellow-Chris- 
tians.  The  thought,  that  Christians  lived  and 
acted  like  other  men  in  outward  things,  is  well 
expressed  in  the  epistle  to  Diognetus,  belonging 
to  the  second  century.  The  Christians,  neither 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  37 


in  speech  nor  in  place  of  abode,  nor  in  usages  of 
life,  differ  from  their  fellow-men.  For  nowhere 
do  they  dwell  in  cities  of  their  own,  nor  make  use 
of  dialects  peculiar  to  themselves,  nor  observe  a 
singular  mode  of  life.  They  marry,  like  all  men, 
and  bear  children ; but  they  do  not  expose  their 
infants,  ” etc. 

Christianity,  then,  was  no  more  the  native  soil 
of  monachism  than  the  Jewish  religion  was  the 
proper  birthplace  of  what  was  ascetic  and  monas- 
tic among  the  Essenes.  The  true  origin  was  in 
that  tendency  of  the  age  towards  a solitary  and 
contemplative  life,  as  being  the  only  life  suited  to 
the  attainment  of  truth  and  virtue,  wliich  began 
some  time  before  the  Christian  era,  and  diffused 
itself  like  some  epidemic  from  the  East,  with  the 
help  of  some  of  the  Greek  philosophical  systems. 
We  hav^e  shown  how  the  contemplative  and  asce- 
tic spirit  was  spread  over  Egypt  in  the  small  com- 
munities of  the  Thera2)eut<B.  It  was  in  Eg}"pt 
that  Pliilo  tlie  Jew  gave  an  allegorical,  mystical 
sense  to  the  historical  parts  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. It  was  here  that  the  first  Christian  ancho- 
rites sought  the  wilderness,  aloof  from  towns,  and 
gave  themselves  up  to  contemplation.  Anthony, 
in  the  third  century,  was  the  most  conspicuous 
example,  and  his  fame,  as  a spiritual  Christian, 
led  other  Christians  to  settle  near  him  in  order  to 
enjoy  the  benefit  of  his  advice  and  society.  Here 
we  have  the  Buddhist  history  acted  over  again, 


38  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

for,  in  the  fourth  century  Pachoinius  (who  had 
been  in  the  military  service,  and  had  an  idea  of 
organization,  perhaps  from  his  former  employ- 
ment), made  an  improvement  on  the  form  of  soli- 
tary life  then  existing.  In  the  place  of  anchor- 
ites, living  near  one  another,  but  with  no  bond 
of  union  except  their  common  religious  views  and 
objects,  he  devised  tlie  plan  of  a body  of  men 
forming  a common  association,  supporting  them- 
selves by  common  industry,  undergoing  a novi- 
tiate, taking  vows,  and  subjected  to  an  abbot 
His  society  of  monks  on  an  island  in  the  Xile  is 
said  to  have  had  seven  thousand  members  before 
his  death  ; and  in  the  fifth  century  fifty  thousand 
men  are  said  to  have  been  obedient  to  its  rules. 
As  the  cloisters  spread,  the  society  was  kept  up ; 
the  abbot  of  tlie  original  Coenobium  being  the 
head  of  the  body,  and  the  abbots  of  the  other 
houses  meeting  together  in  council  to  keep  up  the 
organization.  Cloisters  of  nuns  also  were  insti 
tilted  during  the  life  of  Pachomius ; so  that  be- 
fore his  death  almost  all  that  was  characteris- 
tic of  Christian  monachism,  communities  with 
branches,  or  orders,  embracing  in  separate  places 
the  two  sexes,  rules,  vows — a compact  system,  in 
short,  of  government — had  been  developed. 

Of  the  monastic  sjxstem  in  its  distinct  orders 
spread  over  the  world;  of  the  vast  wealth  which 
belonged  to  the  religious  houses ; of  the  use  of 
monasteries  in  learning,  education,  and  the  relief 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  39 


of  the  poor ; of  the  eminent  services  of  many  ab- 
bots to  letters ; of  the  lights  and  shades  of  their 
religions  life ; of  the  introduction  of  the  begging 
and  preaching  friars  ; of  the  last  stroke  of  worldly 
wisdom  in  the  institution  of  the  order  of  the 
Jesuits;  of  the  services  of  the  monks  in  main- 
taining the  papal  system, — of  these  and  other  re- 
sults of  monasticism  we  can  say  nothing.  We 
confine  ourselves  to  the  simple  inquiry  how  the 
communistic  plan  of  life  stood  related  to  the  great 
mfiuences  of  the  orders  of  monks  upon  the  Chris- 
tian world. 

If  the  life  of  the  anchorite  had  never  given  way 
to  the  conventual  life,  the  type  of  religion  would 
have  become  much  more  distorted  than  it  actually 
was.  The  hermit  in  his  loneliness  was  exposed 
to  all  kinds  of  vagaries  of  the  imagination ; to 
temptations  which  he  would  not  have  been  called 
to  encounter  m society ; to  spiritual  pride  and 
self-righteousness.  If,  instead  of  a solitary  life, 
in  which  industry  for  self-support  and  commu- 
nion with  nature  might  keep  his  mind  in  a some- 
what healthy  condition,  he  should  have  gone 
about  like  a Buddhist  mendicant ; the  burden  of 
relieving  the  wants  of  such  a class  would  have 
been  so  great — supposing  them  to  amount  to  only 
one  or  two  per  cent,  of  the  grown-up  male  popu- 
lation— that  it  would  have  reacted  for  evil  on  the 
condition  of  the  regular  parish  priest.  The  ven- 
erable beggar,  if  he  came  into  frequent  contact 


40  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

with,  the  people,  would  either,  through  his  sup- 
posed sanctity,  have  undermined  the  influence  of 
the  stated  teachers  in  parishes ; or  by  his  fanati- 
cism, extravagance,  and  other  peculiarities,  made 
religion  contemptible.  But,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  monks  in  a convent,  by  the  society  which 
they  held  with  one  another,  must  have  prevented 
many  extravagances,  must  have  kept  the  minds 
of  all  in  a healthier  frame  and  made  them  better 
models  to  their  fellow-men. 

The  influence  of  a common  life  was,  of  course, 
far  gi’eater  for  good  than  that  of  the  life  of  so 
many  hermits.  The  latter  depended  for  the  good 
they  could  do  on  their  own  uncorrected  individual 
convictions,  which  were  generally  colored  with 
fanaticism ; and  on  the  general  impression  which 
their  austerity  and  self-restraint  made  on  persons, 
whose  place  in  the  world  prevented  them  from 
practising  the  ascetic  virtues.  But  in  the  con- 
vent each  member  carried  with  him  the  weight 
and  authority  of  a body  which  was  conceived  to 
be  learned,  holy,  and  pure.  There  was,  again, 
among  the  monks  no  such  separation  from  man- 
kind that  they  could  not  understand  mankind. 
Many  of  the  ablest  men,  some  of  the  Popes  in 
the  Catholic  Church,  and  even  some  of  the  adroit- 
est  negotiators  and  political  managers  came  from 
the  monastic  orders. 

It  may  be  added  that  in  the  cloisters  the  aged 
monks  of  approved  life  would  often  be  great 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  41 


helps  to  the  novices,  and  that  all,  to  some  extent, 
must  have  watched  over  one  another.  They  seem 
often  to  have  had  an  interest  too  intense  in  tlie 
prosperity  of  their  own  community  ; but  their  re- 
gard for  its  reputation  was  by  no  means  an  un- 
mixed evil.  The  solitary  hermit  could  feel  no 
such  motives,  and  was  as  far  away  from  the  fam- 
ily state  as  possible.  In  the  convents  something 
like  family  feeling  was  encouraged.  The  ordi- 
nary members  were  brethren,  hence  called  friars, 
in  French  f reres^  and  on  an  equality  in  the  house- 
hold. The  abbot,  prior,  or  other  superior,  was 
something  like  a father,  as,  indeed,  the  abbot’s 
name  implies.  If  wealth,  literary  culture,  and 
even  political  importance  brought  degeneracy  into 
many  monasteries,  this  shows,  indeed,  that  the 
system  had  in  itself,  without  a permanent  purify- 
ing power,  seeds  of  decay ; but,  with  all  this,  it 
accomplished  a vast  amount  of  good,  which  de- 
pended greatly  on  its  peculiar  social  element. 

We  shall  next  consider  some  of  the  modern 
communities ; after  which  a brief  view  will  be 
taken  of  what  may  be  called  ideal  communism, 
or  the  communism  constructed  by  philosophers. 


42  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 


III. 

ANABAPTISTS  OP  MUNSTER. 

In  a small  community  the  governing  princi- 
ple will  be  more  intense,  for  the  most  part,  than 
the  controlling  idea  will  be  on  which  a large  so- 
ciety is  constructed.  If  we  want  to  find  an  exag- 
geration of  the  patriotic  or  the  fanatical  spirit,  we 
must  look  for  the  first  in  the  city  states  of  Greece, 
or  of  mediaeval  Italy ; and  for  the  other  in  those 
compact  settlements  where,  for  some  reason  or 
other,  the  perverted  religious  spirit  has  for  a time 
gained  control.  An  instance  of  such  control  is 
offered  to  us  by  that  chapter  of  the  history  of 
the  Reformation,  which  has  for  its  subject  tlie 
Anabaptists  at  Munster,  during  their  short  sway 
over  that  ill-fated  place.  A word  or  two  will  be 
of  use  for  connecting  this  affair  with  its  originat- 
ing causes. 

These  causes  are  to  be  traced  back  to  the  myS' 
tical  and  enthusiastic  doctrines,  together  with  the 
revolutionary  movements  and  the  denial  of  the 
validity  of  infant  baptism,  which  characterized 
the  early  Anabaptists.  They  may  all  be  reduced 
to  false  Spiritualism,  Antinomianism,  and  a re- 
turn to  the  Jewish  standpoint.  Thomas  Miinzer, 
a parish  priest  at  Zwickau,  in  Saxony,  in  1521, 
and  there  connected  with  the  Zwickau  prophets 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  43 


SO  called,  was  obliged  to  leave  his  place  and  found 
a new  one  at  Alstedt,  in  Thuringia,  in  1524. 
Here  he  was  willing  to  have  infant  baptism  and 
other  ceremonies  retained ; but  his  unquiet,  tu- 
multuary spirit  made  him  obnoxious  to  Luther 
and  to  the  civil  ruler,  so  that  he  was  again  afloat. 
In  a sermon  here  preached  before  Duke  John  of 
Saxony,  he  called  upon  the  princes  to  root  out  the 
ungodly  with  force  and  without  mercy.  The  un- 
godly, he  said,  have  no  right  to  live,  save  what 
the  elect  will  grant  them. 

From  Alstedt,  Miinzer  went  to  place  after  place 
in  South  Germany;  but  his  chief  activity  was 
concentrated  at  Muhlhausen,  then  pertaining  to 
Saxony,  where  the  people,  driving  away  the  regu- 
lar ministers,  chose  him  as  pastor  of  the  Marien- 
kirche,  in  1525,  and  at  his  suggestion  revolution- 
ized the  town  administration.  The  Peasant’s  War 
had  broken  out  and  raged  all  around  Muhlhausen. 
He  joined  in  the  movement,  was  taken  prisoner, 
and  soon  suffered  death. 

The  mysticism  and  spiritualism  of  Miinzer  led 
him  to  hold  to  immediate  communications  from 
God ; and  the  written  word  he  made  light  of  in 
comparison.  He  thought  little  of  water  baptism, 
and  is  said  to  have  held  that  infant  baptism  was 
not  of  God  ; indeed  his  followers  began  to  rebap- 
tize before  he  did  (Gieseler).  He  interpreted  the 
Scriptures  literally,  and,  as  we  have  seen,  was 
ready  to  root  out  by  persecution  the  ‘^ungodly.” 


44  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

The  kingdom  of  God  on  earth  was  to  be  built  on 
equality  and  community  of  goods. 

The  most  relentless  persecution  arose  against 
the  Anabaptists,  and  in  consequence  they  were 
scattered  abroad  in  Germany  and  the  Nether- 
lands. 

Besides  the  tenet  after  which  they  are  called 
and  on  which  they  agreed,  the  Anabaptists  seem 
to  have  had  no  very  distinct  set  of  opinions. 
Some  held  that  the  flesh  alone  sinned  ; the  spirit 
at  the  Fall  had  not  fallen  with  it.  Some  believed 
that  Christ  redeemed  men  only  by  leading  them 
to  follow  his  footsteps ; while  some  went  further, 
and  denied  his  divinity.  Some 'thought  infant 
baptism  useless  only ; others  thought  that  it  was 
an  abomination.  Some  regarded  military  service 
and  the  oath  to  be  unlawful ; the  former  because 
killing,  the  latter  because  swearing  w^as  alv/ays  a 
sin.  Some  thought  that  marriage  in  the  spirit 
alone  was  valid  ; and  a furrier,  named  Claus  Frei, 
putting  away  his  wife,  went  about  with  another 
woman,  whom  he  called  his  only  right  spiritual 
sister”  (Eanke).  All  found  the  government  of 
the  church  by  magistrates  and  preachers  to  be  in- 
tolerable. Every  man  ought  to  be  allowed  to 
preach ; then  there  would  be  no  divisions.  The 
institutions  of  the  Evangelicals  were  nothing  but 
a new  papacy.  They  believed,  however,  that  all 
this  was  to  be  done  away.  The  kingdom  of  God 
was  soon  to  come. 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  45 


The  commotions  at  Munster  proceeded  first 
from  Rottmaim,  a chaplain  of  the  cathedral  church 
there — a man  to  whom  Melanchthon  imputes,  per- 
haps unjustly,  the  crime  of  taking  off  one  of  the 
syndics  of  the  place  by  poison,  that  he  might  get 
possession  of  his  beautiful  wife.  Rottmann  and 
the  other  ministers  were  in  controversy  with  the 
town  council ; and  Ranke  thinks  that  they  looked 
for  support  to  the  Anabaptists,  who  were  growing 
in  number  among  the  people,  and  who  found  in 
the  city  a favorable  reception.  Near  the  end  of 
1533  the  town  was  filled  with  strangers  of  this 
sect  from  the  Netherlands;  and  in  February  of 
the  next  year  they,  with  their  partisans,  occupied 
the  market-place,  while  the  council  and  the  peo- 
ple holding  with  the  council,  who  were  superior 
in  number,  took  possession  of  the  walls  and  gates. 
The  result  was  the  victory  of  their  party.  ' It  was 
agreed  that  liberty  of  faith  should  be  conceded  to 
every  one,  so  long  as  the  peace  was  kept  and  obe- 
dience rendered  to  the  magistrates.  The  Ana^ 
baptists  now  gained  the  town  by  success  at  the 
election  for  a new  town  council,  their  electors 
having  the  majority;  and  so  the  whole  power 
was  in  the  hands  of  this  faction,  and  Knipperdol- 
ling,  a friend  of  Rottmann’s,  was  chosen  burgo- 
master (Feb.  21st,  1534). 

This  success  was  followed  in  a few  days  (Feb. 
27th)  by  a plot  of  the  Anabaptists  to  drive  the 
other  faction  out  of  the  city.  Armed  men  appear 


46  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

in  the  market-place.  A prophet  cries  out : Away 
with  the  children  of  Esau.  The  inheritance  be- 
longs to  the  seed  of  Jacob.”  Then  the  cry  ran 
through  the  streets : “ Out  with  the  ungodly.” 
They  seem  to  have  made  clean  work  with  the  old 
inhabitants,  including,  of  course,  most  of  the  prin- 
cipal citizens.  No  member  of  the  other  faction 
was  exempted  from  banishment.  All  pictures, 
books,  manuscripts,  and  musical  instruments  were 
destroyed.  One  of  the  leaders  in  this  coup  d^etat 
was  Jan,  or  John  Matthys,  a prophet  who  had 
come  from  the  Netherlands,  and  was  accompanied 
by  Jan  Bockhold,  or  Bockelson,  better  known  as 
John  of  Leyden.  Matthys  held  the  first  place  of 
authority  in  the  town  a few  weeks — L until 
Easter  of  1534,  when  he  was  killed  in  a sally 
against  the  bishop  and  the  princes  who  were  be- 
sieging Munster.  During  this  interval  between 
the  sole  occupation  of  the  town  by  the  Anabap- 
tists and  the  death  of  Matthys  a new  constitution, 
so  to  speak,  was  made.  “ A religious  element,” 
remarks  Ranke,  “ such  as  in  one  way  or  another 
has  appeared  in  more  than  one  century,  was  de- 
veloped here  in  a narrow  circle,  but  within  that 
circle  with  entire  freedom,  and  found  a vent  for 
itself  in  the  most  remarkable  phenomena.” 

We  will  let  the  distinguished  historian  speak 
of  the  new  order  of  things  in  his  own  words: 
“ Among  the  Anabaptists  themselves  all  was  to 
be  common.  The  measures  taken  in  regard  to 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  47 


the  goods  of  the  banished  was  soon  applied  to 
the  property  of  the  believers.  On  pain  of  death, 
they  were  required  to  deliver  up  to  the  chancelry 
their  gold  and  silver  ornaments  and  ready  money 
(or  property)  for  the  common  use.  The  concep- 
tion of  property  ceased ; but  still  every  one  was 
obliged  to  follow  his  ^ own  industry.  We  have 
the  statutes  remaining  in  which  the  journeymen 
shoemakers  and  the  tailors  are  particularly  men- 
tioned. The  latter  are  required  to  see  that  no 
new  style  of  clothes  shall  creep  in.  Every  trade 
was  considered  as  at  once  a commission  and  an 
office.  Of  all  employments  the  principal,  as  is 
readily  understood,  was  the  defence  of  the  city. 
All  together  formed  a religious,  military  family. 
Meat  and  drink  were  provided  at  the  common 
cost.  At  meals  the  two  sexes,  ^ brothers  and  sis- 
ters,’ sat  apart  from  one  another.  They  ate  in 
silence  while  a chapter  was  read  in  the  Bible.” 

John  of  Leyden  at  this  time  was  not  thirty 
years  old,  and  had,  in  his  wandering  life  as  a 
journeyman  tailor,  in  his  trade  as  a merchant 
dealing  with  Lisbon,  and  also  as  a beer-seller, 
seen  a good  deal  of  mankind ; nor  was  he  without 
some  literary  cultivation.  John  Matthys  had 
baptized  him;  he  had  learned  something  from 
the  writings  of  Melchior  Hoffmann,  one  of  the 
leaders  among  the  Anabaptists ; he  had  a toler- 
able knowledge  of  the  Scriptures.  His  vivid 
imagination  and  imposing  form  made  him  popu- 


48  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

lar.  He  was  put  into  the  place  of  Matthys  by 
his  own  act,  and  probably  by  some  kind  of  elec- 
tion. For  a time  he  did  not  reveal  his  plans. 
At  length  he  declared  that  twelve  elders  must  be 
appointed  over  the  new  Israel  (as  there  were 
twelve  persons,  one  from  each  tribe,  in  the  old 
Israel),  who  should  be  overseers  and  judges. 
Their  decisions  were  to  be  made  known  to  the 
congregation  through  him,  and  were  to  be  exe- 
cuted by  Knipperdolling.  Soon  he  wanted  a 
new  law  to  be  passed  that,  as  in  the  ancient  peo- 
pie  of  God,  so  in  the  new  one,  in  order  to  pro- 
duce a holy  seed,  every  man  should  be  allowed  to 
take  more  wives  than  one.  Rottmann,  who  had 
gone  along  with  the  fanatics,  accepted  this  pro- 
ject also  and  supported  it  by  his  sermons.  John 
of  Leyden  had  private  views  of  his  own  in  get- 
ting this  law  passed.  He  was  married,  but  had 
conceived  a passion  for  the  young  widow  of  Mat- 
thys, for  whom  the  latter  had  forsaken  his  wife. 
Afterward  he  added  new  wives,  so  that  his  harem 
amounted  to  some  seventeen. 

It  was  this  step  which  led  to  an  eiiwute^  which 
was  put  down  with  the  loss  of  some  two  hundred 
lives.  Having  advanced  thus  far,  he  succeeded 
in  taking  one  step  more.  He  wished  to  be  king, 
after  the  pattern  in  the  Old  Testament.  A 
prophet  declared  that  he  had  learned  from  God 
by  a revelation  that  John,  as  king  of  a new 
Israel,  was  to  reign  over  the  whole  earth,  and  to 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  49 


set  up  again  the  throne  of  David.  John  himself 
then  confirmed  the  words  by  saying  that  the  same 
revelation  had  been  made  to  him.  The  royal 
title  was  conferred  on  him.  He  assumed  royal 
state,  and  took  a house  for  his  queen  and  the 
other  sixteen  women. 

These  events  must  have  taken  place  in  the 
summer  and  autumn  of  1534.  In  October  the 
Lord’s  Supper  was  celebrated  in  the  market- 
place, at  which  more  than  four  thousand  were 
present.  John  served  the  bread  to  the  men,  and 
his  wife,  Divara,  the  widow  of  Matthys,  to  the 
women.  At  the  table  John  saw  a stranger  who 
did  not  have  on  a wedding-garment.  He  rose 
from  his  seat,  conceiving  him  to  be  a spy,  cut  his 
head  off,  and  went  back  to  the  Supper. 

The  siege  of  Munster  dragged  along  through 
this  year  (1534),  and  as  the  place  was  well  pro- 
vided with  necessaries,  there  was  no  immediate 
prospect  of  its  reduction.  The  Roman  King  Fer- 
dinand now  decided  to  lend  his  aid ; but  no  suc- 
cessful attempt  to  take  the  place  by  storm  was 
made  until  the  summer  of  1535,  although  the 
people  within  the  walls  began  to  feel  the  extremi- 
ties of  famine.  In  June  two  deserters  led  forces 
of  the  enemy  over  the  walls  by  night,  a gate  was 
broken  open,  and  after  a desperate  contest  the 
city  came  into  the  hands  of  the  bishop  and 
princes.  Rottmann  found  his  death  in  the  affray ; 
but  John  of  Leyden  was  taken  captive  and  put  to 


50  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

death,  after  defending  liis  opinions  on  baptism, 
polygamy,  and  community  of  goods  by  the  Scrip- 
tures. 

It  is  perhaps  idle  to  speculate  on  the  probable 
condition  of  Munster  if  it  had  been  safe  from  the 
assaults  of  enemies.  The  probability  is  that  the 
principal  leaders  would,  by  the  help  of  their  pre- 
tended prophecies,  have  turned  into  intolerable 
tyrants,  and  met  with  some  due  punishment  from 
the  men  of  their  own  faith,  when  their  wicked- 
ness had  become  full.  As  for  the  community  of 
goods  in  so  considerable  a population,  it  does  not 
seem  probable  that,  with  an  administration  such 
as  that  existing  at  Munster,  it  could  have  been 
long  maintained,  even  if  the  Anabaptists  had 
secured  peace  with  their  neighbors.  Nor  could 
the  faith  in  the  prophets  have  long  continued. 

IV. 

THE  SHAKERS  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

The  history  of  communism  receives  valuable 
contributions  from  experiments  that  have  been 
made  in  the  United  States.  Although  the  first 
settlers  came  chiefiy  from  a class  in  society  and  a 
land  which  held  individual  property  in  higli  hon- 
or, yet  in  the  early  times  of  the  colony  in  Vir- 
ginia there  was  properly  no  separate  ownership  of 
land,  but  only  omiership  of  shares  in  the  company. 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  51 


This  departure  from  the  rule  of  private  property, 
although  not  an  extreme  one,  was  attended  with 
disastrous  results.  A single  man  did  only  about 
a third  of  a fair  day’s  work,  and  the  system  of 
separate  proprietorship  was  introduced  after  four 
years  of  trial. 

From  the  time  of  the  first  settlements  until  the 
age  of  the  Revolution,  if  there  were  any  commu- 
nistic societies  founded,  I have  met  with  no  ac- 
count of  them.  The  first,  which  has  had  a long 
life,  was  that  of  the  Shakers,  or  Shaking  Quakers, 
as  they  were  at  first  called,  on  account  of  their 
bodily  movements  in  worship.  The  members  of 
this  sect  or  society  left  England  in  1774,  and  have 
prospered  ever  since.  It  has  now  multiplied  into 
settlements — twelve  of  them  in  New  York  and 
New  England — in  regard  to  which  we  borrow  the 
following  statistics  from  Mr.  Nordhoff’s  book  on 
communistic  societies  in  the  United  States,  pub- 
lished in  1875.  Their  property  consists  of  49,335 
acres  of  land  in  home  farms,  with  other  real  es- 
tate. The  value  of  their  houses  and  personal 
property  is  not  given.  The  population  of  all  the 
communities  consists  of  695  male  and  1,189  fe- 
male adults,  with  531  young  persons  under  twen- 
ty-one, of  whom  192  are  males  and  339  females, 
amounting  in  all  to  2,415  in  1874.  The  maxi- 
mum of  population  was  5,069,  a decline  to  less 
than  half,  for  which  we  are  not  able  to  account 
save  on  the  supposition  that  there  are  permanent 


52  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

causes  of  decay  now  at  work  within  the  com- 
munities. One  of  them,  that  at  Tyringham, 
Mass.,  has  lately  been  disbanded. 

The  other  communities  (except  the  Oneida  and 
Wallingford  settlements  of  the  Perfectionists, 
which  are  strictly  indigenous,  and  the  Shakers, 
who  are  of  English  origin)  are  of  non-English  ex- 
traction. That  is,  they  originated  in  movements, 
either  of  Germans  or  of  others  holding  peculiar 
views,  to  find  a religious  and  social  liberty  on  this 
side  of  the  water,  which  was  not  possible  in  their 
own  country ; or  they  represent  the  social  opinions 
of  some  of  the  great  lights  of  Europe  in  that  de- 
partment of  philosophy.  Of  these,  eleven  belong 
to  what  Mr.  Noyes,  the  founder  of  the  Perfection- 
ist communities,  in  his  history  of  American  Social- 
isms (1870),  calls  the  Owen  group,  created  either 
personally  by  Robert  Owen  or  to  be  traced  back 
to  his  infiuence.  All  of  these  eleven  settlements 
have  miserably  failed,  and  the  average  duration 
of  eight  of  the  principal  ones  is  about  a year  and 
a half. 

The  communities  founded  in  a degree  on  the 
‘^rule”  of  Fourier,  in  or  after  the  year  1843, 
when  the  system  of  this  Frenchman  began  to  be 
preached  and  reduced  to  experiment,  were  in  all 
about  thirty-four.  All  of  these  have  now  entirely 
disappeared,  and  a large  number  of  them  lasted 
only  a few  months.  We  must  not  believe,  how- 
ever, that  any  of  that  freedom  between  the  sexes 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  53 


was  contemplated  or  allowed  in  them,  which  Fom 
rier  himself  would  have  permitted  without  shame. 
JSTor  were  these  settlements  properly  communistic ; 
since  labor,  capital,  and  skill  were  all  factors  in  the 
scheme  of  the  first  founder.  We  may  pass  them 
by,  therefore  ; and  have  need  only  to  say  of  the 
colony  founded  by  Cabet,  author  of  a Utopia 
called  the  Voyage  to  Icaria,”  that  in  1850  he 
led  a colony  to  Nauvoo,  after  the  Mormons  were 
driven  away ; that  in  1856  the  leader  went  to  St. 
Louis,  with  some  of  his  followers,  leaving  the  rest 
at  the  first  home  of  the  body;  that  these  dis- 
persed ere  long,  some  of  them  forming  a new  set- 
tlement  near  Corning,  in  Iowa,  which,  when  Mr. 
Nordhoff  saw  it,  consisted  of  only  sixty -five  meim 
bers,  in  eleven  families.  These  people  were  chiefly; 
French  in  extraction,  of  a nationality  which  finds 
it  hard  to  maintain  colonies  in  new  conditions  of 
life ; and  the  founder  seems  to  have  been  a theo^ 
rist,  incompetent  to  lead  the  way  in  a new  organi- 
zation.  It  ought  to  be  mentioned,  however,  for 
his  credit,  that  he  required  his  colonists  to  marry 
and  live  in  the  family  state. 

From  these  abortive  attempts  to  establish  com- 
munities in  the  territory  of  the  United  States  we 
turn  to  others  which  are  more  successful.  The 
oldest,  the  Shakers,  were  at  their  origin  a society 
of  enthusiasts  in  humble  life,  who  separated  from 
the  Quakers  about  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth 
centuiy.  Ann  Lee,  one  of  the  members,  on  ac- 


54  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

count  of  spiritual  manifestations  believed  to  have 
been  made  to  her,  became  an  oracle  in  the  body  ; 
and  in  1773  she  declared  that  a revelation  from 
heaven  instructed  her  to  go  to  America.  The 
next  year  she  crossed  the  sea,  with  eight  others, 
and  settled  in  the  woods  of  Watervliet,  near 
Albany.  She  preached,  and  was  believed  to  have 
performed  remarkable  cures.  From  her  were  de- 
rived the  rule  of  celibacy,  and,  for  persons  seek- 
ing admission  into  the  infant  society,  the  obliga- 
tion to  make  an  oral  confession  of  sin  in  the  pres- 
ence of  an  older  member  of  the  community.  She 
died  in  1784,  as  the  acknowledged  head  of  the 
church;  and  had  afterward  nearly  equal  honors 
paid  to  her  with  the  Saviour.  Under  the  second 
successor  of  Ann  Lee  almost  all  the  societies  in 
New  York  and  New  England  were  founded ; and 
under  the  third,  a woman  named  Lucy  Wright, 
whose  leadership  lasted  nearly  thirty  years,  those 
in  Ohio  and  Kentucky.  The  latter  grew  up  dur^ 
ing  the  remarkable  revivals  in  Kentucky  at  the 
beginning  of  the  century,  which  were  attended 
with  involuntary  convulsions  of  the  body.  After 
1830  the  Shakers  founded  no  new  society. 

Mr.  NordhofP  gives  the  leading  doctrines  of  the 
Shakers,  which  are,  some  of  them,  singular  enough. 
They  hold  that  God  is  a dual  person,  male  and  fe- 
male ; that  Adam,  created  in  his  image,  was  dual 
also  ; that  the  same  is  true  of  all  angels  and  spir- 
its ; and  that  Christ  is  one  of  the  highest  of  spir* 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  55 


its,  who  appeared  first  in  the  person  of  Jesus  and 
afterward  in  that  of  Ann  Lee.  There  are  four 
heavens  and  four  hells.  Noah  went  to  the  first 
heaven,  and  the  wicked  of  his  time  to  the  first 
hell.  The  second  heaven  was  called  Paradise, 
and  contained  the  pious  Jews  until  the  appear^ 
ance  of  Christ.  The  third,  that  into  which  the 
Apostle  Paul  was  caught,  included  all  that  lived 
until  the  time  of  Ann  Lee.  The  fourth  is  now 
being  filled  up,  and  “is  to  supersede  all  the 
others.” 

They  hold  that  the  day  of  judgment,  or  begin- 
ning of  Christ’s  kingdom  on  earth,  began  with 
the  establishment  of  their  church,  and  will  go  on 
until  it  is  brought  to  its  completion.  The  Pente- 
costal Church,  they  think,  was  the  standard  and 
true  church,  from  which  the  Christians  fell  away ; 
but  the  Shaker  community  has  returned  to  the 
true  doctrine  and  practice.  Its  main  principles 
vrere  common  property,  celibacy,  non-resistance, 
a separate  government  [from  that  of  the  state?], 
and  power  over  diseases.  All  these  they  embody 
in  their  system  except  the  last,  which  also  they  have 
a hope  of  receiving.  They  discard  the  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity,  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  and 
the  Atonement.  They  worship  neither  Christ 
nor  Ann  Lee ; but  pay  both  love  and  reverence. 

They  have  a belief  that  a sinless  life  is  within 
human  reach,  and  that  to  this  “ all  their  members 
ought  to  attain.” 


5G  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

In  regard  to  marriage  and  property,  they  do 
not  take  the  position  that  these  are  crimes ; but 
only  marks  of  a lower  order  of  society.  The 
world  will  have  a chance  to  become  pure  in  a fu- 
ture state  as  well  as  here. 

They  believe  in  spiritual  communication  and 
possession.  They  tliemselves  have  conversed 
with  spirits — even  with  those  that  lived  before 
the  Flood.  They  claim  that  inspired  gifts  have 
been  granted  to  their  churches.  In  the  earlier 
times  of  the  sect  they  professed  to  have  the  gift 
of  tongues. 

The  travels  of  President  Dwight  malce  mention 
of  this  gift  of  tongues  in  a letter  of  the  author 
written  as  early  as  1799  (Vol.  III.,  p.  161).  1 

give  his  words : “ The  company  at  whose  w^orship 
I was  present  declared  that  they  could  speak  with 
tongues,  and  that  both  the  words  and  the  tune 
were  inspired.  I observed  to  them  that  the 
sounds  which  they  made,  and  which  they  called 
language,  could  not  be  words,  because  they  were 
not  articulated.  One  of  the  women  replied : 
‘How  dost  thee  know  but  that  we  speak  the 
Ilotmatot  language  ? The  language  of  the  Ilot- 
matots  is  said  to  be  made  up  of  such  sort  of 
words.’  ” 

Dr.  Dwight  in  the  same  place  gives  statements 
from  the  work  of  one  Thomas  Brown,  once  a 
Quaker,  and  for  a time  a member  of  the  Society 
of  Shakers,  but  afterward  dismissed  from  their 


SMALLEli  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  57 


body.  This  book,  published  in  1798,  gives  very 
disparaging  accounts  of  the  morality  of  Ann  Lee 
and  her  brother,  William  Lee,  and  says  of  the 
society  that  they  esteem  it  lawful  to  lie,  to  de- 
fraud, and  quote  Scripture  falsely,  for  the  good 
of  the  church — lawful  for  the  elders,  at  least,  if 
not  for  the  brethren.  Another  charge  is  that 
they  retain  the  property  and  refuse  to  pay  for  the 
labor  of  such  as  leave  them,  alleging  for  it  the 
reason  that  they  will  only  spend  it  on  their  lusts. 
But  these  and  similar  charges  against  their  char- 
acter eighty  years  ago  must  be  received  with 
many  grains  of  allowance,  if  not  entirely  disbe- 
lieved ; both  because  they  come  from  a man  who 
was  expelled  from  the  community  after  living 
seven  years  in  it ; and  because,  in  later  times,  no 
such  charges,  so  far  as  we  know,  have  been  re- 
newed on  good  evidence. 

Dr.  Dwight  himself  seeks  to  do  them  justice. 
‘‘Probably,”  says  he,  “there  never  was  a sillier 
enthusiasm  than  this ; yet,  by  a singular  combina- 
tion of  circumstances,  it  has  become  to  society 
the  most  harmless,  and  in  some  respects  the  most 
useless,  perhaps,  of  all  the  mental  extravagances 
of  this  nature  recorded  in  history.  The  doctrines 
are  so  gross  that  they  never  can  spread  far ; while 
the  industry,  manual  skill,  fair  dealing,  and  or- 
derly behavior  of  the  brotherhood  render  them 
useful  members  of  society.” 

The  Shakers  (leaving  ^out  of  sight  for  the  pres- 
s' 


58  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

ent  tlie  children  from  abroad,  who  are  brought 
up)  consist  of  two  orders : novices,  or  such  as  are 
not  full  members  of  the  community,  and  full 
members.  The  latter  are  not  easily  accessible  to 
strangers  in  their  houses.  All  communication 
v/ith  travellers  and  others  whose  curiosity  draws 
them  to  the  Shaker  settlements  takes  place  at 
the  houses  where  the  novices  are  lodged.  When 
a person  wishes  to  join  the  body,  his  first  duty  is 
to  make  a full  confession  to  an  elder  of  the  same 
sex  with  himself.  It  would  seem  that  this  con- 
fession is  renewed  afterward  from  time  to  time ; 
for  one  of  the  elders,  cited  by  Mr.  Nordhoff,  says 
that  it  often  takes  years  for  individuals  to  com- 
plete this  work  of  thorough  confession  and  re- 
pentance;” to  which  he  adds  that,  “upon  this, 
more  than  upon  aught  else,  depends  their  success 
as  permanent  and  happy  jnembers.”  The  effect 
of  such  a confession,  made  to  God  in  the  presence 
“of  one  of  his  true  witnesses,”  can  bring,  they 
justly  think,  upon  the  person  making  the  confes- 
sion, “a  more  awful  sense  of  his  accountability 
both  to  God  and  to  man  than  all  his  confessions 
in  darkness  had  ever  done.” 

The  candidate  for  membership  brings  his  prop- 
erty with  him,  which  is  held  in  trust  by  the  com- 
munity. The  use  of  it  goes  to  the  body,  and  he 
is  maintained,  without  wages  of  labor  or  receipt 
of  interest.  When  he  enters  tlie  body  he  gives 
up  all  claim  upon  his  property  forever.  If  this 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  59 


be  SO,  the  complaint  of  Brown,  which  has  been 
mentioned,  is  entirely  without  foundation. 

The  community  of  goods  is  connected  with  a 
common  life  of  great  plainness,  and  of  obligation 
to  work  under  the  authorized  foreman.  The 
habits  of  all  the  Shaker  bodies  are  exceedingly 
neat  and  frugal.  This,  with  their  industry,  di- 
rected by  experience  to  profitable  objects,  has 
made  them  thriving  and  even  wealthy. 

Their  worship  on  Sunday  consists  of  singing  a 
hymn,  addresses  by  a male  and  a female  elder, 
with  a kind  of  shuffling  dance,  in  which  all  parti- 
cipate. Sometimes  silent  prayer  is  called  for  by 
an  elder.  Sometimes  the  prayers  of  the  assem- 
bly are  requested  by  some  person  in  distress  of 
mind.  Sometimes  a person  sets  up  a whirl  or 
circular  dance  which  continues  for  a considerable 
time.  Their  meetings  in  their  public  or  family 
hall  are  partly  religious  and  partly  social. 

For  many  particulars  of  their  social  life,  for 
their  intercourse  with  spirits,  for  their  family 
police  and  the  care  taken  to  prevent  anything 
which  would  cause  scandal,  we  must  refer  to  Mr. 
Nordhoff’s  volume,  one-quarter  of  which  is  de- 
voted to  this  form  of  communistic  life.  Spring- 
ing out  of  the  Society  of  Friends,  they  have  in- 
herited some  of  the  mystical  and  spiritual  ele- 
ments of  the  latter,  together  with  their  tendency 
to  quietude  and  to  rationalism.  Their  community 
of  goods  is  apparently  derived  from  that  of  the 


63  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

Pentecostal  Churcli ; their  speaking  with  tongues 
is  hut  a repetition  of  that  recorded  in  the  Book  of 
Acts  and  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians — or, 
rather,  a copy  of  an  original  about  which  they 
know  little ; their  confession  is  suggested  by  the 
confession  recommended  in  the  Epistle  of  James ; 
their  dances,  perhaps,  point  back  to  David  and 
Miriam.  In  some  things  they  bear  a resemblance 
to  the  Essenes  and  the  Therapeutse : thus,  in  fill- 
ing up  their  numbers  by  means  of  adopted  chil- 
dren, they  are  like  the  former ; in  their  dances, 
like  the  latter ; in  their  being  a celibatary  union, 
like  both  ; and  in  the  living  of  the  sexes  together, 
again  like  the  latter.  We  may  add  that,  like  the 
Therapeutae,  they  lead  a life  free  from  ascertained 
scandal.  In  shrewdness,  economy,  and  practical 
management,  they  are  surpassed  by  communities 
on  no  other  basis. 


V. 

SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  CONCLUDED. 

In  the  present  article  our  aim  will  be  to  take  a 
brief  view  of  several  other  of  the  modern  com- 
munities which  have  established  themselves  in 
the  United  States,  and  to  lay  down  some  general 
conclusions  respecting  this  class  of  societies.  The 
oldest  of  these  was  founded  by  George  Eapp,  a 
peasant  from  Wiirtemberg,  who,  to  escape  perse- 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  61 


cution  from  the  clergy,  on  account  of  liis  un- 
licensed preaching,  led  a colony  of  like-minded 
persons  across  the  Atlantic,  and  settled  first,  in 
1805,  in  Butler  County,  Pennsylvania ; then,  in 
1814,  on  the  Wabash,  in  Indiana;  and,  finally, 
turning  his  face  eastward  again,  erected  a new 
village  on  the  Ohio,  near  Pittsburgh.  The  first 
two  abodes  were  called  Harmony ; that  in  Indi- 
ana he  sold  to  Robert  Owen,  and  named  his  last 
dwelling-place  Economy.  About  1832  there  was 
a split  among  Rapp’s  followers,  headed  by  a 
worthless  adventurer  from  Germany.  The  disaf- 
fected portion  withdrew,  and  planted  another  col- 
ony in  the  neighborhood,  which  ere  long  wasted 
away.  Rapp,  who  died  in  1847,  was  the  spirit- 
ual head,  while  his  son  took  charge  of  temporal 
affairs.  After  the  son’s  death,  the  community 
gave  both  spiritual  and  temporal  supervision  into 
the  old  man’s  hand,  who  associated  with  himself 
in  the  latter  charge  two  of  the  society  in  whom 
he  could  trust. 

Tlie  property  was  regarded  as  common  stock  at 
an  early  date  ; but  in  1818  it  was  made  such  by 
a common  agreement,  with  the  provision  that,  if 
a member  died  or  withdrew  from  the  society, 
nothing  could  be  claimed  on  his  or  his  heirs’  ac- 
count as  a matter  of  right. 

In  the  early  times  of  the  settlement  the  mem- 
bers were  free  to  marry ; but  after  a religious  re- 
vival in  1807  they  decided  to  institute  celibacy,  a 


62  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

decision  which  led  a number  of  young  persons  to 
leave  the  society.  George  Rapp,  according  to 
Mr.  Nordhoif,  neither  urged  nor  opposed  this  im- 
portant step,  yet  gave  it  as  his  opinion  that  the 
unmarried  is  the  higher  and  holier  state.”  This 
opinion  is  consonant  with  another — that  God  and 
the  first  man  both  had  a dual  nature,  and  that, 
but  for  the  Fall,  new  beings  would  have  come  into 
the  world  without  being  born  of  woman.  The 
coming  of  Christ  and  a new  world  they  hold  to 
be  close  at  hand.  The  wicked  are  to  be  ultimate- 
ly redeemed. 

Like  the  Shakers,  they  require  of  neophytes  a 
full  confession  of  sins  to  one  of  the  elders. 
Their  principal  act  of  worship  is  an  annual  Lord’s 
Supper,  in  October. 

The  community  has  been  prosperous,  and  their 
property,  which  in  1854  was  worth  a million  of 
dollars,  is  now  considerably  larger.  Yet  their 
numbers — one  hundred  and  ten  elderly  persons; 
besides  thirty  or  forty  adopted  children — fore- 
bode their  decline,  and  the  community  must  soon 
disappear.  None  of  the  communities  in  this 
country  have  had  a more  estimable  founder. 

The  Separatists  of  Zoar,  in  Tuscarawas,  Ohio, 
like  the  Rappites,  were  led  by  persecutions  in 
Wiirtemberg  to  emigrate  (in  1817)  to  the  United 
States,  and,  being  aided  by  Quakers,  purchased 
the  land  where  they  now  dwell.  They  soon  came 
to  the  conclusion  that,  if  they  would  succeed, 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  63 


they  must  have  a community  of  goods. 
soon  as  we  adopted  community  of  goods,”  said 
one  of  the  older  members  to  Mr.  Nordhoff,  we 
began  to  prosper.”  They  are  now  worth  more 
than  a million  of  dollars ; but  their  number, 
which  was  two  hundred  and  fifty  in  1819,  is  now 
not  more  than  three  hundred. 

They  allow  the  marriage  of  their  members ; but 
to  Mr.  Nordhoff’s  inquiry  whether  they  favored 
it,”  the  reply  was,  ‘^that  it  was,  on  the  whole,  un- 
favorable to  community  life.”  Their  leader,  al- 
though a married  man  himself,  taught  that  ‘‘  God 
did  not  look  with  pleasure  on  marriage,  but  only 
tolerated  it;”  that  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
“ husband,  wife,  and  children  will  not  know  each 
other.  There  will  be  no  distinction  of  sex  there.” 
The  remarkable  fact  recorded  by  Mr.  Nordhoff, 
that  when  children  had  reached  the  age  of  three, 
they  were  separated  from  their  parents,  and 
brought  up,  girls  and  boys  apart,  under  the  care 
of  persons  specially  appointed  for  that  purpose, 
shows  a feeling  that  family  life  is  inconsistent 
with  communal  life.  This  practice,  however, 
was  abandoned  in  1845. 

The  Zoarites  in  their  creed  are  orthodox 
Christians  as  to  the  Trinity,  the  Fall,  salvation 
through  Christ,  and  the  authority  of  the  Scrip- 
tures; but  they  discard  both  baptism  and  the 
Lord’s  Supper.  A candidate  for  admission  into 
their  community  must  pass  through  a probation ; 


64  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

and,  when  received  into  membership,  must,  as  in 
other  similar  societies,  place  his  property  under 
the  community’s  exclusive  control.  Like  the 
Rappites,  at  Economy,  the  Zoarites  have  declined 
considerably  in  numbers  during  the  era  of  their 
greatest  prosperity.  Owing,  perhaps,  to  their 
principal  leaders,  they  are  found  to  be  inferior  in 
intelligence  and  refinement  to  the  other  commu- 
nities. 

The  Inspirationists  emigrated  in  1842  from 
South  Germany,  to  a place  near  Buffalo,  which  in 
1855  they  sold,  without  loss,  and  removed  by  de- 
grees to  a place  in  Iowa,  which  they  call  Amana, 
a few  miles  to  the  west  of  Iowa  City  and  on  the 
river  of  the  same  name.  Here  they  have  seven 
villages,  and,  when  Mr.  Nordhoff  visited  them, 
they  counted  1,450  members  and  owned  25,000 
acres  of  land.  They  were  united  in  Germany  as 
a religious  body ; but  foi*med  their  communal  sys- 
tem after  reaching  the  United  States.  Having  a 
considerable  amount  of  property  among  them 
when  they  left  Europe,  they  seem  to  have  been 
more  prosperous  from  the  first  than  most  of  the 
other  German  communities.-  To  their  commu- 
nity of  goods,  adopted,  as  they  think,  by  inspira- 
tion, they  attribute  their  ability  to  hold  together. 
Tliey  allow  marriage;  bitt  regard  it  as  a merito- 
rious act  to  remain  single.  Their  temporal  af- 
fairs are  managed  by  thirteen  male  trustees. 
Their  religious  leader  may  be  of  either  sex.  They 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  65 


are  orthodox  Christians  in  most  respects ; hut  re- 
ject the  endless  punishment  of  the  wicked.  The 
Lord’s  Supper  is  celebrated  whenever  the  inspired 
leaders  direct.  The  admission  of  candidates  for 
membership  is  on  much  the  same  plan  as  in  the 
other  communities  of  which  we  have  spoken.  It 
differs  from  some  of  them  in  this  respect:  that 
when  the  person  admitted  leaves  the  society  the 
property  given  up  by  him  is  returned,  although 
without  interest.  On  the  whole,  these  commu- 
nists of  Amana  seem  to  be  as  prosperous  as  any 
others  in  the  United  States.  Their  bond  of  union 
is  the  Inspired  Guide ; and  whenever  this  part  of 
the  system  gives  way,  before  increasing  intelli- 
gence, the  whole  system — which  in  its  spirit  is 
more  like  an  ordinary  colony  of  homogeneous 
persons  than  most  others — must  be  expected  to 
fall  to  pieces. 

There  is  yet  another  communistic  system,  of 
which  I would  fain  say  nothing,  because  decency 
forbids  saying  much.  This  is  the  system  of  the 
Perfectionists  at  Oneida  and  Wallingford,  which 
bodies  consist  of  people  above  the  average  intelli- 
gence of  the  Shakers  and  the  German  commu- 
nists in  the  United  States,  and  have  been  thus  far 
shrewd  and  prosperous  in  their  business  transac- 
tions. Of  their  faith  and  practice  I will  give  a 
faint  idea  in  two  quotations  from  the  History  of 
American  Socialisms,”  by  Mr.  Noyes,  their  found- 
er (1876). 


60  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

“Admitting,”  he  says,  page  625,  “that  tlie 
community  principle  of  the  Day  of  Pentecost,  in 
its  actual  operation  at  that  time,  extended  only  to 
material  goods,  yet  we  affirm  that  there  is  no  in- 
trinsic difference  between  property  in  person  and 
property  in  things ; and  that  the  same  spirit, 
wliich  abolished  exclusiveness  in  regard  to  money, 
W’ould  abolish,  if  circumstances  allowed  full  scope 
to  it,  exclusiveness  in  regard  to  women  and  chil- 
dren.” And  again,  while  criticising  Fourier,  he 
says(p.  630):  “ Holiness,  free  love,  association  in 
labor,  and  immortality  constitute  the  chain  of  re- 
demption and  must  come  together  in  their  true 
order.”  “ It  is  evident  that  any  attempt  to  revo- 
lutionize sexual  morality  before  settlement  wdth 
God  is  out  of  order.  Holiness  must  go  before 
free  love  ” (p.  631). 

Such  opinions  are  daily  acted  on  and  freely 
avowed.  Mr.  ISTordhoff  was  permitted  to  be  pres- 
ent at  a Sunday  afternoon  “ criticism,”  as  they 
call  it,  which  he  describes  at  some  length.  At 
the  end  the  head  of  the  community  spoke.  “ Con- 
cerning the  closing  remarks  of  Noyes,”  says  he(p. 
293),  “which  disclose  so  strange  and  horrible  a 
view  of  morals  and  duty,  I need  say  nothing.” 
And  we  have  said  enough.  [Comp.  Appendix  L] 

We  are  now  prepared  to  lay  down  certain  con- 
clusions touching  communal  societies  as  they  pre- 
sent themselves  to  us  in  modern  times.  In  doing 
this,  W3  are  av/are  of  the  danger  of  hasty  general- 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  67 


izations,  and,  of  course,  feel  that  they  may  be 
drawn  into  question ; but  the  history  of  such  in-* 
stitutions  has  tested  them  on  so  many  sides  that 
we  have  some  confidence  in  the  justness  of  our 
results. 

1.  In  the  first  place,  then,  it  is  shown  that,  with 
equally  good  management,  a community  offers  a 
somewhat  cheaper  mode  of  living  than  that  which 
families  adopt  in  separate  houses.  Fourier  was 
not  wrong  in  claiming  that  his  phalansteries  would 
furnish  lodgings  for  the  poor  at  a smaller  price 
than  separate  hovels  would ; and  in  all  the  expen- 
ses for  food  and  other  necessaries  a greater  econ- 
omy is  possible.  But  this  economy  is  possible, 
not  only  because  thirty  rooms  within  four  walls 
are  less  costly  than  five  houses,  each  with  six 
rooms  of  like  quality ; or  because  cooking,  wash- 
ing, heating  on  the  large  scale  are  less  expensive 
than  on  the  small ; but  because,  and  principally 
because,  in  the  community  persons  can  live  as 
they  will,  beyond  the  infiuence,  perceived  or  un- 
perceived, of  a general  social  opinion.  Simplicity 
can  be  aimed  at  in  all  the  parts  of  life ; luxuries 
may  be  cut  off  which  are  accessible  outside  of  the 
common  village  and  its  neighborhood. 

2.  Again,  the  union  of  family  life  and  commu- 
nal life  is  not  fitted  to  make  the  community  sys- 
tem fiourisli.  The  two  are  different  and  to  an 
extent  hostile  principles.  The  family  must  draw 
off  the  interests  of  its  members  from  the  larger 


68  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

body  which  encloses  it,  and  concentrate  them  on 
itself.  If  the  family  has  a share  in  the  common 
property,  that  may  be  a motive  for  existing  faini- 
lies  to  remain  in  it ; .but  every  new  family  would 
inquire,  Why  should  we  join  the  society,  when 
we  have  our  own  unity  to  bind  us  together  and  a 
plenty  of  persons  in  the  world  whom  we  know 
and  love  ? ” The  family  implies  a sort  of  privacy 
and  seclusion  from  the  world,  without  separation ; 
the  community  implies  separation  from  the  world, 
and  a new  unity  inconsistent  with  or  controlling 
the  smaller  or  family  union.  In  some  of  the 
communities  spoken  of  above  it  was  found  that 
they  began  to  thrive  when  they  adopted  the  celi- 
bate principle.  Groups  of  families,  then,  united 
by  some  communal  bond,  are  not  likely  to  be  suc- 
cessful if  such  an  experiment  should  be  tried. 

3.  It  follows  that  the  more  such  communities 
are  separated  from  the  world  by  their  mode  of 
life  or  principles,  the  more  probable  will  be  their 
permanence.  This  is  only  saying  that  something 
permanent  in  its  own  nature,  some  common  faith 
especially,  if  it  has  drawn  them  together,  will  be 
likely  to  keep  them  together.  It  is  true  that,  if 
they  begin,  after  the  community  is  established,  to 
speculate  and  doubt,  there  will  be  divisions  among 
them,  as  there  may  be  other  causes  of  divisions, 
from  cliques  and  parties.  But  divisions  from  the 
former  cause  will  be  less  natural  than  if  they  held 
their  opinions  in  the  midst  of  the  world  ; for  they 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  69 


have  now  escaped  from  a strong  opposing  senti- 
ment, from  ridicule  and  social  ostracism. 

4.  Eeligious  reasons  for  founding  communal  es- 
tablishments are  more  likely  to  insure  success  than  ‘ 
others.  Here  we  mean  by  religious  reasons  any 
held  in  common  touching  the  relations  of  man  to 
God  and  to  the  end  of  living,  whether  they  in- 
clude objectionable  features  or  not.  If  such  ob- 
jectionable features  belong  to  the  community,  they 
will  naturally  act  against  it,  both  within  and  in  the 
opinion  of  an  outside  society,  which  condemns  oi^ 
even  abhors  its  creed  or  practices.  And  to  some 
extent  this  must  weaken,  if  it  do  not  soon  de- 
stroy, the  settlement.  But  religion,  seriously  en- 
tertained, for  which  men  have  sacrificed  some- 
thing, is  a very  strong  bond  of  union.  It  ties  a 
small  community  together  and  keeps  them  apart 
from  the  rest  of  the  world.  It  may  make  them 
even  dread  the  world.  It  cannot  be  an  accident 
that  Cabet’s  and  Eobert  Owen’s  societies,  with  no 
religion,  have  had  a poor  success  and  a short  life ; 
while  ignorant  Germans,  as  spiritual  guides,  led 
colonies  adopting  a common  life  into  this  land, 
which  have  had  a very  far  greater  amount  of  pros- 
perity. 

5.  It  would  seem  that  communities  consisting 
of  well-educated  and  cultivated  persons  have  no 
assurance  of  success.  The  motive  to  undertake  a 
new  manner  of  life  is  wanting.  They  lead  such  a 
life  already,  and  have  such  friends  and  sources  of 


70  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

enjoyment,  as  they  desire.  , Why  should  they 
wish  to  change  ? Moreover,  they  are  more  indi- 
vidual and  independent  than  others  of  an  inferior 
grade.  Why  should  they  give  up  their  freedom  ? 

W e can  conceive  of  a group  of  families,  with  the 
highest  religious  character  and  cultivation,  as  being 
disgusted  with  the  corruptions  of  the  society  around 
them,  and  as  seeking  their  escape  in  local  separa- 
tion and  in  closer  union  with  one  another.  But, 
not  to  dwell  on  the  fact  that  they  could  hardly  do 
this  without  being  untrue  to  religious  principle, 
they  would  probably  feel  it  easier  and  safer  to 
withdraw  in  some  degree  from  the  society  around 
them  than  to  take  such  a revolutionary  step  in 
life. 

Communities  will  consist  hereafter,  then,  as 
they  have  done,  chiefly  of  persons  in  humble  life ; 
of  those  whose  minds  are  uneasy  and  out  of  joint ; 
and  of  such  as  have  found  no  place  of  rest  in  the 
general  society  of  the  world. 

6.  As  for  health  and  prosperity  in  their  under- 
takings, communities  on  the  best  footing  have  much 
to  say  for  themselves.  Several  that  began  poor 
have  risen  into  great  prosperity.  It  may  be  said, 
indeed,  that  lands  have  been  purchased  for  them 
in  this  country  which  would  have  cost  twenty 
times  as  much  at  home,  and  that  some  of  them 
have  run  backward,  almost  into  bankruptcy ; but, 
apart  from  this,  the  economy  of  living  which  we 
have  spoken  of  and  an  orderly  arrangement  of 


SMxVLLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  71 


work,  under  shrewd  supervisors,  with  abstinence 
from  hurtful  drinks,  must  have  placed  them  above 
the  same  number  of  persons  arranged  in  families. 
If,  for  instance,  a community  consisted  of  five  hun- 
dred persons,  a number  equal  to  about  that  of  a 
hundred  families ; it  would  probably  save  more  at 
the  end  of  the  year  than  those  families  would,  sup- 
posing them  engaged  in  the  same  industries.  And, 
while  a number  of  these  families  would  be  injured 
or  ruined  by  the  vice  of  the  father,  the  community 
would  be  less  likely  to  be  harmed  by  the  miscon- 
duct of  the  superintendent  and  the  carelessness  of 
the  foreman.  Y et  it  must  be  taken  into  consid- 
eration that  the  number  of  active  laborers  in  the 
community  of  five  hundred  would  be  much  great- 
er than  in  the  one  hundred  families.  But,  at  all 
events,  it  is  probable  that  the  savings  of  an  equal 
amount  of  hours’  work  in  the  community  would 
be  greater.  And,  with  equal  endeavors  on  the 
part  of  the  communities  to  secure  health,  these 
endeavors  would  be,  it  is  probable,  attended  with 
more  success. 

7.  Of  course,  in  the  communities,  where  they 
are  strictly  such,  the  family  affections — one  essen- 
tial means  by  which  man  rises  above  the  brute, 
and  religion  with  all  human  improvement  finds  a 
home  in  the  world — are  nearly  undeveloped. 

8.  If  we  could  conceive  of  a group  of  commu- 
nistic societies  pervading  a country,  on  the  suppo- 
sition that  they  were  merely  voluntary  and  only 


72  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

protected  by  the  state,  as  private  families  are  now, 
tlie  system  would  tend  to  break  up  general  socie- 
ty ; and  this  would  happen,  even  if  there  were  a 
brotherhood  maintained  between  these  communi- 
ties, as  far  as  could  be  possible.  Society  would 
lose  many  of  those  fibres  of  connection  which  run 
across  it  now  in  every  direction,  and  much  of  the 
life  and  enterprise  which  now  exist.  As  family 
life  would  then  need  to  develop  itself  within  and 
under  community  life,  much  of  its  power  would 
be  lost.  The  interest  felt  in  the  affairs  of  the 
body  politic  would  probably  be  in  a considerable 
degree  diminished.  The  nation  would  be  reduced 
into  the  smaller  component  parts,  and  the  general 
administration  of  law  be  made  difficult.  Wheth- 
er the  national  power  itself  could  with  success  take 
the  place  of  control  and  close  superintendence  over 
these  communities ; whether  by  a constitution  and 
general  laws  a state  could  successfully  organize 
society  on  a community  plan,  is  an  interesting 
question,  which  will  need  our  attention  when  we 
come  to  look  at  the  most  modern  socialism  and 
the  socialized  state.  But  we  must  regard  a wide 
communistic  system  upon  a volunta/ry  basis  as  cer- 
tain to  fail. 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  73 


APPENDIX  I.— No.  1. 

A few  weeks  before  this  work  went  into  the 
press,  Mr.  J.  H.  Noyes,  the  founder  of  the 
Oneida  and  Wallingford  communities,  and  the 
author  of  the  history  of  American  socialism  to 
which  we  have  referred  in  this  work,  proposed 
to  the  Oneida  community  the  following  articles, 
which  have  been  adopted  as  a basis  of  a new 
system. 

“ I propose : 

1.  That  we  give  up  the  practice  of  comple; 
marriage,  not  as  renouncing  belief  in  the  prin 
ciples  and  prospective  finality  of  that  institution  j 
but  in  deference  to  the  public  sentiment  which  is 
evidently  rising  against  it. 

“ 2.  That  we  place  ourselves  not  on  the  plat- 
form of  the  Shakers,  on  the  one  hand,  nor  of  the 
world,  on  the  other ; but  on  Paul’s  platform, 
which  allows  marriage,  but  prefers  celibacy. 

“ To  carry  out  this  change,  it  will  be  necessary, 
first  of  all,  that  we  should  go  into  a new  and  earn- 
est study  of  the  Yth  chapter  of  1 Corinthians,  in 
which  Paul  fully  defines  his  position,  and  also 
that  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  in  regard  to  the 
sexual  relations  proper  ‘for  the  church,  in  the 
presence  of  worldly  institutions. 

“ If  you  accept  these  modifications,  the  com- 
munity will  consist  of  two  distinct  classes — the 
4 


74  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

married  and  the  celibates — both  legitimate;  but 
the  last  preferred. 

What  will  remain  of  our  communism  after 
these  modifications  may  be  defined  thus : 

^^1.  We  shall  hold  our  property  and  businesses 
in  common,  as  now. 

^^2.  We  shall  live  together  in  a common  house- 
hold and  eat  at  a common  table,  as  now. 

“3.  We  shall  have  a common  children’s  depart- 
ment, as  now. 

^^4.  We  shall  have  our  daily  evening  meetings 
and  all  of  our  present  means  of  moral  and  spirit- 
ual improvement.” 

Thus  the  immoral  and  most  objectionable  fea- 
tures of  these  communities  being  removed — for  it 
can  hardly  be  questioned  that  the  associated  com- 
munity of  Wallingford  will  concur  in  the  pro- 
posed changes — they  will  be  placed  on  the  same, 
or  nearly  the  same,  basis  with  the  most  religious 
and  successful  of  the  American  communities,  such 
as  those  of  Zoar  and  of  Amana. 

How  far  this  great  change  has  been  owing  to 
a feeling  within  the  community,  where,  as  it 
would  seem,  the  younger  members  have  not  all 
been  satisfied  with  the  most  obnoxious  feature  of 
the  system ; and  how  far  it  has  been  forced  on 
the  members  by  a very  decided  opinion  outside, 
which  even  called  on  the  civil  authority  to  inter- 
fere in  the  matter,  we  cannot  positively  say.  The 
change  is  a cheering  and  hopeful  one,  as  showing 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  75 


that  no  society  can  have  long  continuance  in  this 
country,  however  successful  in  its  industrial  af- 
fairs, which  is,  and  is  generally  held  to  be,  op- 
posed to  social  morality. 


APPENDIX  I.— No.  2. 

In  1878  appeared  a small  work,  entitled 
^‘American  Communists,”  by  William  Alfred 
Hinds,  a member  of  the  Oneida  community,  and 
an  editor,  I believe,  of  the  American  Socialist. 
It  contains  the  results  of  personal  observations, 
and  as  the  author  is  an  educated  man,  having  re- 
ceived the  degree  of  Ph.B.,  in  the  Sheffield  School 
of  Yale  College  (1870),  and  wites  candidly,  his 
work  deserves  confidence.  I have  to  acknowledge 
the  receipt  of  a copy  from  the  intelligent,  fair- 
minded  author. 

We  have  room  for  only  a few  additions  to 
what  we  have  said  respecting  some  of  these  com- 
munities, and  for  a short  notice  of  one  of  them 
not  mentioned  before. 

1.  The  Harmonists  of  Economy,  Beaver  Co., 
Pa.,  are  still  fiourishing  in  a high  degree,  as  to 
their  business  affairs,  but  are  dwindling  in  their 
numbers.  The  thousand  members  are  reduced 
to  one  hundred,  and  of  these  but  few  are  under 
sixty  ” (p.  7).  ‘‘  The  young  people,  on  reaching 


76  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

maturity,  are  allowed  to  decide  between  becoming 
full  members  of  the  society  (provided  of  course 
they  are  of  suitable  character),  or  going  outside,  or 
remaining  and  working  for  wages ; and  more  pre- 
fer the  latter  alternative  than  the  former,  though 
required  in  such  case  to  conform  to  the  customs 
of  the  society,  even  in  respect  to  celibacy ; but 
the  greater  number  prefer  a life  of  complete  in- 
dependence, with  all  its  drawbacks,  to  the  re- 
straints of  communism.”  (pp.  19-20). 

It  seems  possible  that  this  community  must  be- 
come extinct  in  the  course  of  a generation,  or 
change  its  constitution  in  some  important  re- 
spects. 

2.  The  Zoarites,  or  Separatists  of  Zoar,  Tusca- 
rawas County,  Ohio,  are  still  wealthy  and  pros- 
perous ; they  own  7,200  acres  of  land,  with  vari- 
ous mills  and  other  property,  all  of  which  they 
estimate  to  be  worth  $731,000.  Their  number  is 
now  reduced  from  five  hundred  to  two  hundred  and 
fifty,  although  marriage  is  freely  allowed,  and 
generally  exists  among  them.  This  diminution 
comes  from  the  unwillingness  of  the  young  peo- 
ple to  live  in  the  community,  and  seems  to  show 
that  marriage  in  a highly  fiourishing  community 
cannot  keep  up  its  numbers.  “ There  are  one 
hundred  and  seventy-five  persons  who  subsist  on 
wages  paid  by  the  community.”  To  the  inquiry 
what  the  elfect,  on  the  body,  was  of  employ- 
ing so  many  hirelings,  they  answered : Very 


SMALLER  COMIVIUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  77 


injurious.  They  tempt  our  people  into  bad 
habits.  We  commenced  hiring  about  1834,  after 
the  cholera  had  swept  off  about  one-third  of  our 
old  members.’’  Few  of  the  older  members  quit 
the  community,  but  new  members  frequently 
leave,  and  many  of  the  young  folks  leave  as  they 
become  of  age  ” (pp.  28-31). 

The  Zoarites  are  orthodox  Christians,  averse 
to  all  ceremony  in  worship,  and  under  a constitu- 
tion which  provides  sufficiently  for  their  welfare. 
Why,  then,  do  they  not  thrive  more  in  respect  to 
their  numbers  ? The  reasons  seem  to  be,  fii’st,  that 
the  community  feeling  is  not  sufficiently  strong ; as 
is  shown  by  the  fact  that  the  children  leave  the 
society  more  or  less,  and  that  new  members,  in- 
stead of  signing  the  covenant  and  becoming  mem- 
bers in  full,  with  a right  to  vote  and  be  elected 
trustees  or  into  the  standing  committee,  choose  to 
stay  in  the  lower  class,  where,  if  dissatisfied,  they 
may  withdraw  with  their  property  paid  back  to 
them.  In  short,  the  outside  world  is  too  little 
separated  from  the  community  to  induce  novices 
and  the  young  to  enter  into  a full  and  final  union ; 
and  the  spirit  of  the  outside  world  is  brought  into 
the  body  by  new  adherents,  and  by  hired  men. 
Habits  have  changed  since  the  times  succeeding 
the  foundation.  Then  all  the  persons  and  fami- 
lies in  one  house  did  their  work  together.”  Now 
each  family  ” (^.  ^.,  the  inhabitants  of  one  house, 
as  I understand  it)  “ attends  to  all  its  affairs,  its 


78  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

cooking,  washing,  etc.,  separately.”  This  again  re- 
veals a tendency  towards  family  life,  rather  than 
towards  community  life.  Again,  ^‘for  fifteen 
years  after  the  Zoarites  began  to  marry  (p.  32), 
it  was  a rule  that  children  should  be  taken 
care  of  by  the  society,  from  the  time  they  were 
three  years  old,  and  they  were  for  this  purpose 
placed  under  superintendents  appointed  by  the 
community.”  The  older  members  regret  this, 
which  is  evidently  a movement  towards  family 
life  (pp.  31,  32,  33). 

The  Amana  community  of  Inspirationists  was 
found  by  Mr.  Hinds  to  be  in  a very  fiourishing 
condition,  both  as  it  respects  numbers  and  wealth ; 
their  members  being  1,600,  their  lands  amounting 
to  from  25,000  to  30,000  acres,  and  their  manu- 
facturiug  industries  being  quite  prosperous.  They 
live,  as  we  have  seen,  in  seven  villages  situated  in 
Iowa  Co.,  Iowa,  which  are  near  enough  one  to  an- 
other to  preserve  the  entire  unity  of  superintend- 
ence and  common  feeling.  There  are  five  hmidred 
children  under  sixteen  years  of  age,  and  more 
than  two  hundred  aged  persons,  in  the  villages. 

Marriage  is  tolerated,  but  it  is  deemed  best  to 
remain  single,  as  St.  Paul  advises.  Formerly 
marriage  was  looked  on  with  a more  unfriendly 
eye  than  at  present ; but  a young  man  now  may 
not  marry  until  he  is  twenty-four,  and  he  must 
wait  a year  after  he  has  announced  his  intention, 
before  he  can  lead  his  betrothed  to  the  altar. 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  79 


By  marriage,  the  standing  of  the  parties  in  the 
society  suffers  for  a time.  If  a man  marries  out 
of  the  society,  he  is  excluded  for  a while,  even 
though  his  wife  might  choose  to  become  a mem- 
ber. At  table,  church,  and  labor  the  sexes  are 
separated  ’’  (p.  63). 

This  community  is  sincerely  religious  in  the 
servile  way  of  following  the  letter  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. Thus  they  believe  in  the  prophetic  inspi- 
ration which  has  fallen  on  two  members  of  the 
community,  Christian  Metz,  a carpenter,  and  Bar- 
bara Heynemann,  an  ignorant  servant-girl,  who, 
since  1867,  has  had  the  prophetic  office  alone,  and 
is  consulted  by  the  trustees  in  important  affairs. 
It  was  by  inspiration,  they  say,  that  they  were  led 
to  adopt  community  of  goods  after  their  emigra- 
tion to  this  continent. 

The  most  interesting  question  for  our  object,  is. 
What  has  been  the  cause  of  the  prosperity  of  these 
people  ? Several  causes  may  be  alleged  as  hav- 
ing combined  to  produce  this  effect.  One  is  that 
the  community  is  separated  by  its  German  origin 
and  adherence  to  the  German  language  from  the 
outside  world.  Another  is  that  the  new  mem- 
bers seem  to  be  supplied  chiefly  from  within  or 
by  accessions  of  persons,  few  at  a time,  from  Ger- 
many. Another  is  the  strict  religiousness  and 
practical  morality  of  members.  There  is  some 
religious  expression  before  and  after  every  meal ; 
there  is  a meeting  for  prayer  every  evening; 


80  SMALLER  COmiUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

there  are  meetings  on  Wednesday,  Saturday,  and 
Sunday  mornings.  Sometimes  they  all  meet  in 
church ; sometimes  in  smaller  apartments  and  in 
order.  For  the  members  are  divided  into  three 
classes:  the  first  including  the  elders  and  the 
most  earnest  and  spiritual ; the  second,  those  who 
have  made  considerable  progress  in  conforming 
to  the  highest  standard ; and  the  third,  the  chil- 
dren, new  members,  back-sliders,  and  others  ” 
(p.  53).  But  besides  these  reasons,  we  incline  to 
think  that  the  sombreness  and  want  of  intellec- 
tual life  of  the  community  must  be  attractive 
chiefiy  to  those  who  have  no  great  interest  in  the 
movements  of  the  outside  world. 

Mr.  Hinds  thinks  that  they  fail  to  realize  the 
blessings  which  belong  to  communism,  by  not  suf- 
ficiently concentrating  their  dwellings  and  labor. 
Every  village  ought  to  have,  he  thinks,  a few 
large  houses,  where  a single  kitchen  and  dining- 
room would  save  labor  and  expense ; so  also  to 
have  a common  butter  and  cheese  factory,  in- 
stead of  each  eating-house  making  these  products 
of  the  dairy  by  hand,  as  well  as  a common  laun- 
dry with  the  requisite  apparatus.  Yet  the  build- 
ing of  a common  laundry  is  in  contemplation. 
He  adds,  that  each  village  ought  to  have  a large 
libraiy  and  eating-room,  but  there  is  nothing  of 
the  kind.  They  have  preserved  from  the  first 
the  utterances  of  the  prophets,  and  printed  them 
in  more  than  a hundred  volumes  ” (pp.  53,  54). 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  81 


Mr.  Hinds  (pp.  152-161)  gives  an  account, 
chiefly  in  the  language  of  the  founder,  of  the 
Brotherhood  of  the  New  Life,”  which  has  two 
principal  centres,  one  at  Salem-on-Erie,  in  the 
town  of  Portland,  N.  Y.,  and  the  other  in  Foun- 
tain Grove,  Santa  Rosa,  California,  where  Thomas 
L.  Harris,  the  originator  of  the  plan  of  life,  re- 
sides. He  was  a Universalist  preacher,  then  a 
Spiritualist  “ and  a leader  of  Christian  against  in- 
fidel Spiritualism,”  then  one  of  the  leaders  of  the 
Mountain  Cave  Community,  a spiritualistic  soci- 
ety; and  has  led  and  acted  in  several  other 
places.  “The  Brotherhood,”  says  Mr.  Hinds, 
“ claim  to  have  evoluted  out  of  communism,  but  at 
one  time  held  their  property  in  common,  and  still 
carry  it  on  together,  and  possess  many  other  com- 
munistic features,  both  in  theory  and  in  practice” 
(p.  142).  Mr.  Harris  says : “ Personally  I am  not  a 
communist.  I find  it  impossible  to  maintain  the 
ordinary  relations,  much  more  to  unite  in  close 
association  commuhistically  with  my  nearest 
friends.  My  home  is  practically  an  hermitage: 
the  evolution  of  my  faculties  has  led  me  into 
strict  natural  celibacy  ” (p.  142). 

Mr.  Harris  again  says:  “I  find  no  difficulty 
in  the  solution  of  the  painful  and  perplexing 
problem  of  the  sexes.  Monogamists  who  enter 
into  union  with  me,  rise,  by  changes  of  life, 
into  a desire  for  the  death  of  natural  sexuality. 
Those  whose  lives  have  been  less  strict  at  first, 
4* 


82  SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 

perhaps,  may  pass  through  the  monogamic  rela- 
tion, though  not  always;  but  the  end  is  the 
same.  Still  I do  not  believe  that  sexlessness 
characterizes  man  in  his  higher  and  final  evolu- 
tion” (p.  146). 

And  again  he  says:  “Among  my  people,  as 
they  enter  into  the  peculiar  evolution  that  consti- 
tutes the  new  life,  two  things  decrease : the  propa- 
gation of  the  species,  and  physical  death.  One 
young  pair  in  our  borders  have  had  three  chil- 
dren, I am  sorry  to  say ; but,  with  this  exception, 
the  births  in  seventeen  years  have  been  but  two ; 
and  of  these,  the  younger  is  almost  a young  man. 
We  think  that  generation  must  cease  till  the  sons 
and  daughters  of  God  are  prepared  for  the  higher 
generation  by  evolution  into  structural  bi-sexual 
completeness  above  the  plane  of  sin,  of  disease,  or 
of  natural  mortality  ” (ibid.). 

“ I have  considered  my  family,”  he  adds,  “ since 
1861,  merely  as  a school : its  methods  education- 
ary, and  its  form  only  tentative.  My  aim,  se^ 
has  been  neither  to  organize  close  nor  far  apart 
association,  but  to  prepare  myself  and  the  inmates 
of  my  house  for  a new  era  of  human  evolution^ 
which  we  have  considered  to  be  at  hand,  and 
which,  in  individual  cases,  we  think  has  now 
begun.  We  think  that,  by  the  survival  of  the  fit- 
test, the  most  plastic,  the  most  complex  organ- 
isms— men  of  a new  spirit  wrought  bodily  into 
new  structures — the  race  will  take  a new  depar- 


SMALLER  COMMUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE.  83 


ture ; that  we  approach  a new  beginning  of  human 
days  and  generations  ” (p.  147). 

In  a letter  of  an  earlier  date  (1873),  from  which 
Mr.  Hinds  makes  extracts,  Mr.  Harris  is  much 
more  on  the  Christian  foundation.  ^‘The  one 
object  of  the  Brotherhood,”  says  he,  ^^is  the  real- 
ization of  the  noble  Christian  ideal  in  social  ser- 
vice. It  is  simply  an  effort  to  demonstrate  that 
the  ethical  creed  of  the  Gospel  is  susceptible  of 
service  as  a working  system,”  etc.  “ In  one  sense 
the  Brotherhood  are  Spiritualists  ” (p.  149).  “ In 
another  sense  they  are  socialists  ” (p.  150). 

After  all  this  theosophico-Darwinian  stuff,  we 
fail  to  find  out  anything  tangible  and  practical 
respecting  this  brotherhood’s  aims  and  doctrines. 
As  for  the  family  at  Salem-on-Erie,  which  is  ex- 
ceedingly reticent  and  unwilling  to  gratify  curios- 
ity (See  Hinds,  p.  151),  we  learn  (p.  149)  that 
their  hotel  and  store  were  closed,  their  railway 
restaurant  was  burnt,  and  neither  their  vine-cul- 
ture nor  other  business  in  a very  fiourishing  con- 
dition. Some  of  the  estate  had  been  sold,  and 
the  impression  was  that  they  would  gladly  dis- 
pose of  more.”  Part  of  the  family  had  fol- 
lowed their  leader  to  California,  and  others,  it 
was  thought,  would  follow.  The  family  at  Foun- 
tain Grove  numbers  at  present  about  twenty  per- 
sons (p.  151). 

They  have  adopted  the  notion,  entertained  by 
some  of  the  other  communities,  that  ^Hhe  crea- 


84:  SMALLER  COmiUNITIES  WITHIN  A STATE. 


live  Logos” — God  manifest  in  the  flesh — is  not 
male  merely  or  female  merelj^,  but  the  two-in- 
one  (Harris  in  Hinds,  p.  147).  They  have  re- 
cently published  two  pamphlets,  entitled,  “ The 
Lord,  the  Two-in-One,”  and  “ Hymns  of  the  Two- 
in-One  ” (p.  151). 


COMMUNISTIC  THEOKIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  85 


CHAPTEE  III. 

COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

L 

PLATO — SIR  THOMAS  MORE— CAMPANELLA. 

The  communities  hitherto  noticed  had  at  their 
foundation  no  direct  pui'pose  of  acting  upon  gen- 
eral society  or  upon  the  state.  Their  obj  ect,  rather, 
was  to  keep  away  from  their  members  the  influ- 
ences of  the  outside  world  as  far  as  possible,  and 
in  all  liberty  to  develop  their  own  social  and  re- 
ligious views.  To  society,  as  at  the  time  consti- 
tuted, they  entertained  no  such  hatred  as  the 
most  modern  socialists  feel.  They  thought  only 
that  they  had  reached  a better  form  of  society, 
yet  one  which  it  would  not  be  possible  for  all  men 
to  adopt ; one  that  all  men  would  not  willingly 
adopt.  Their  plans  thus  ended  in  a great  degree 
with  themselves  and  with  separation  from  the  rest 
of  mankind. 

But  might  not  principles  similar  to  theirs,  in 
some  respects,  be  carried  out  upon  a larger  scale 
and  by  the  state  itself?  In  every  old  society 


86  COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

there  have  been  and  must  perhaps  always  be 
evils,  growing  out  of  institutions  as  old  and  as 
much  revered  as  the  state.  There  is,  especially 
in  a society  which  is  growing  corrupt  in  conse- 
quence of  its  prosperity,  and  which  is  advanced 
enough  in  reflection  to  think  upon  the  causes  of 
social  evils,  a tendency  to  search  for  some  cure  of 
these  evils,  which  lies  beyond  the  reach  of  indi- 
viduals and  can  only  be  applied  by  the  highest 
authority.  And  it  is  not  strange  that  inexperi- 
enced, speculative  thinkers,  who  saw  how  much 
evil  arose  from  private  property,  from  family  life, 
from  the  unrestricted  action  of  the  individual, 
should  seek  for  a cure  of  such  evil  in  a complete 
transformation  of  society.  Men  are  not  just.  The 
city  or  the  state  is  not  a unity,  but  is  split  up  by 
factions  and  strifes  of  classes.  How  can  such 
evils  be  removed  save  by  the  state  itself,  the  only 
power  sufficient  for  the  undertaking  ? Such  ques- 
tions would  be  asked  not  so  much  by  men  of  an 
ordinary  stamp  as  by  those  who  had  strong  moral 
sensibilities  and  a high  ideal  of  the  ends  aimed  at 
by  life  in  the  world.  If  such  men  had  a practical 
spirit  and  any  hope  of  success,  they  would  become 
reformers.  If  they  were  of  another  sort,  they 
would  construct  Utopias. 

Plato  has  left  in  his  Republic  ” an  image  of  a 
state  which  is  intended  to  set  forth  the  reign  of 
justice  in  a community.  Whether  it  was  to  him 
a mere  Utopia,  or  whether  it  was  something  more, 


COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  87 


has  been  long  made  a question.  His  scholar,  Aris- 
totle, treats  his  means  for  attaining  to  the  great 
end  of  political  justice,  as  if  they  were  to  be  real- 
ized in  an  actual  state.  On  the  other  hand,  in  his 
‘‘  Book  of  Laws  ” there  is  another  republic  contem- 
plated— one  in  which  the  ordinary  relations  of  so- 
ciety are  to  be  protected  and  defended  ; in  which, 
on  the  existing  basis,  society  is  to  be  made  as  just, 
pure,  and  reverential,  as  laws  and  institutions  can 
make  it.  Taking  the  two  works  together,  we 
must  either  say  that  Plato  regarded  the  picture  of 
a just  state  which  appears  in  his  Republic  ” as 
a mere  illustration  of  the  same  harmonious  action 
which  can  be  traced  in  the  just  individual ; or  we 
must  say  that  he  regarded  his  institutions  in  the 
Republic  ” as  desirable  in  themselves,  and  saw 
nothing  immoral  in  them,  so  long  as  they  con- 
duced to  the  common  good,  to  the  unity  and  ex- 
emption from  selfishness  in  the  classes  of  which 
his  Republic  ” consists.  That  this  last  explana- 
tion is  the  true  one  appears  from  a passage  in  the 
‘‘  Laws,”  where  he  says  that  the  first  or  best  state 
and  the  best  laws  would  be  foimd  where  nothing 
existed  that  is  separate  and  not  common ; where 
wives  were  common  and  children  and  everything 
that  could  be  used.”  Such  a state,  whether 
gods  or  children  of  gods  inhabited  it,  would  be  a 
happy  abode.”  But  the  state  which  he  is  treating 
of  would  be  next  in  its  immortality,  and  the  first 
in  a second  class.  So,  then,  to  some  degree  we 


88  COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

must  make  the  genial  philosopher  responsible, 
and  deserving  of  Aristotle’s  severe  rebulves. 

The  state,  however,  in  the  “ Republic  ” is  not 
worked  out  in  all  its  features.  The  classes  are 
three  in  number — the  rulers,  the  guards,  and  the 
workingmen  or  artificers  and  cultivators ; answer- 
ing to  the  reason^  the  soul  as  the  seat  of  courage 
and  feeling,  and  to  desire  or  the  desires.  And, 
as  the  regular  action  of  each  of  these  departments 
of  the  spiritual  being  insures  right  conduct  or  jus- 
tice, so  the  right  action,  unity,  and  justice  of  the 
state  is  preserved  by  the  orders  of  society,  each 
fulfilling  its  part.  But  Plato,  in  developing  his 
subject,  says  very  little  in  regard  to  the  first  and 
the  third  class.  The  former  would,  of  course,  be 
small ; and  its  recruits  were  to  be  taken  from  the 
most  trusty  among  the  guards.  The  third  class 
may,  for  aught  that  appears,  own  property,  live  in 
families,  and  be  like  the  same  class  in  other  com- 
monwealths; and  if  among  their  children  some 
should  show  conspicuous  ability,  they  are  to  be 
transferred  to  the  class  of  guards ; as  also,  if  there 
are  children  of  the  guards  who  fall  below  the 
qualities  proper  for  that  class,  they  are  to  be 
thrust  down  into  the  third  class,  for  we  sometimes 
find,  says  Plato,  that  a golden  father  has  an  iron 
son. 

The  guards  themselves,  whose  especial  ofiice  it 
is  to  protect  the  state  from  foreign  enemies  and 
from  domestic  seditions,  are  to  have  no  houses. 


COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  89 


nor  lands,  nor  anything  which  they  can  call  their 
own.  The  women  who  are  selected  to  continue 
the  race  of  the  guards  are  to  be  wives  of  no  one 
in  particular,  but  of  the  whole  class ; and  care  is 
to  be  taken  by  the  rulers  that,  when  children  are 
born  to  this  or  that  woman,  no  one  of  the  guards 
shall  be  able  to  say.  This  child  is  mine.  All  the 
children  belong  to  all ; and  thus  separate  and  ex- 
clusive relations  to  wives  and  children,  the  causes 
of  disunion  in  a state,  are  to  be  obliterated. 

The  criticisms  of  Aristotle  on  this  kind  of  polity 
show  not  only  how  Plato  failed  to  gain  his  end ; 
how  he  would  destroy  the  state  by  removing  dif- 
ferences; and  how  that  in  which  the  greatest 
numbers  share  receives  the  least  care  from  each  ; 
but  also  how  abhorrent  this  scheme  was  to  the 
Greek  mind.  That  such  changes  in  society  could 
be  seriously  proposed  is  to  be  accounted  for  by 
the  prevailing  Greek  view,  that  the  state  had 
nearly  unrestricted  power ; that  it  was  the  sover- 
eign, which  held  the  fortunes  and  destinies  of  the 
citizens  in  its  hands.  That  they  had  little  chance 
of  being  accepted  may  be  gathered  from  the  ridi- 
cule which  they  met  with  from  the  leading  comic 
poet  of  Athens. 

The  Eepublic  ” of  Plato  may  have  suggested 
the  Utopia  of  Sir  Thomas  More,  written  in  Latin, 
and  first  published  in  or  earlier  than  the  year 
1516,  in  the  first  part  of  the  reign  of  Henry  YIII. 
.':.ncl  before  the  author  had  come  into  political  im- 


90  COMMUJTISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

portance.  It  is,  perhaps,  to  be  regarded  as  a mere 
dream ; for,  at  the  close  of  the  work,  it  is  said  by 
one  of  the  interlocutors : “ K,  on  the  first  hand,  I 
cannot  adhere  to  all  that  has  been  said  by  Hyth- 
lodeus  [the  discoverer  of  the  Island  of  Utopia]  ; 
on  the  other,  I readily  confess  that  there  are 
among  the  Utopians  many  things  which  I could 
wish  to  see  established  in  our  cities.  I wish  this 
more  than  I hope  for  it.”  The  name  Utopia,  also, 
meaning  no  place^  seems  to  point  at  something 
outside  of  the  real  world,  to  the  imaginary  seat  of 
an  imaginary  republic.  Some  of  his  sentiments 
were  either  mere  fancies  or  were  belied  by  his 
conduct  afterward.  Thus  all  religions  are  equally 
tolerated  and  equally  bound  to  tolerate  one  an- 
other. Pure  deism  is  the  predominant  faitff; 
but  those  who  deny  the  being  of  God  or  the  im- 
mortality of  the  soul  are  incapacitated  for  holding 
oflice.  This  book  was  printed  but  a year  or  so 
before  the  first  outbreak  of  the  Reformation ; yet 
its  author,  when  he  became  cliancellor,  fourteen 
years  afterward,  consented  to  measures  of  severity 
against  the  Protestants. 

The  Utopia  opens  with  a sad  account  of  the 
social  state  of  England,  which  is  attributable  to 
the  number  of  non-producers,  to  the  rich  who 
take  from  the  poor,  to  the  idle  who  prevent  the 
industrious  from  prospeidng.  To  this  the  speaker 
who  had  discovered  Utopia  replies,  that  in  all 
states  where  individual  property  exists,  where 


COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  91 


everything  is  measured  by  money,  justice  can 
never  reign  nor  secure  the  public  prosperity.  In 
order  to  establish  a just  balance  in  human  affairs, 
property  must  be  abolished.  As  long  as  this 
right  of  property  lasts,  the  largest  and  best  class 
can  only  bear  the  burden  of  unrest,  misery,  and 
sorrow.  Palliatives  for  this  evil  may  be  found — 
such  as  laws  fixing  a maximum  of  possessions  in 
land  or  money ; but  they  cannot  remove  the  evil 
so  long  as  individual  property  exists.  The  sole 
remedy  is  community  of  goods,  such  as  prevails 
in  Utopia. 

In  this  island,  separated  from  the  main-land 
by  an  artificial  channel,  there  is  a capital,  with 
fifty-four  other  towns,  all  built  on  the  same  plan 
and  calculated  for  6,000  families,  with  many  large 
farm-houses  scattered  through  the  country,  and 
able,  each,  to  accommodate  at  least  forty  persons. 
All  the  inhabitants  must  work  on  the  farm  or  in 
some  branch  of  industry ; and,  as  no  one  can  be 
idle,  a day’s  work  consisting  of  six  hours  will  suf- 
fice for  all  the  wants  of  the  island.  Then  the 
rest  of  the  day  may  be  devoted  to  study  in  the 
public  colleges,  and  the  evening  to  recreation. 

In  the  island  markets  for  provisions  are  estab- 
lished, and  public  magazines  for  manufactures. 
Every  head  of  a family  finds  there,  without  cost, 
all  necessary  articles.  Meals  are  taken  in  com- 
mon. There  are  also  common  hospitals  and  com- 
mon nurseries,  where  mothers  may  nurse  their 


92  COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

cliildren.  Marriage  is  the  law  and  usage  of  the 
land ; hut  the  number  of  children  in  separate 
dwellings  is  equalized,  by  taking  away  the  excess 
from  one  family,  and  placing  them  in  another. 

Money  is  unkno\^m  among  the  Utopians  except 
as  an  aid  to  external  intercourse.  Nor  is  travel- 
ling into  the  interior  allowed,  except  by  permis- 
sion of  the  magistrates ; in  which  case  the  trav* 
eler  pays  for  the  conveyance  and  provisions  fur- 
nished to  him  by  laboring  wherever  he  stops. 

The  government  is  simple.  Every  thirty  fami- 
lies choose  a magistrate ; every  ten  of  these  divi- 
sions, a superior  magistrate ; and  a prince  is  elected 
by  the  inferior  magistrates  out  of  four  candidates 
proposed  by  the  people.  Every  town  sends  three 
deputies  to  a legislature,  invested  with  legislative 
powers  and  sitting  at  the  capital.  The  magis- 
trates have  it  for  their  principal  office  to  keep 
.people  at  work.  But  would  the  system  encour- 
age work  or  idleness  ? This  important  inquiry  is 
proposed  in  the  course  of  the  dialogue,  but  meets 
with  no  sufficient  answer. 

I have  mentioned  some  of  the  details  of  More’s 
plan,  because  the  socialists  of  the  more  modern 
times  have  seen  the  same  difficulties,  and  pro- 
posed some  of  the  same  expedients  for  their  re- 
moval. The  Utopia  may  be  regarded  as  written 
long  before  the  era  when  social  changes  were 
called  for  with  a loud  voice,  yet  as  foreseeing  the 
course  which  such  changes  would  take. 


COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  93 


Another  ideal  reformer,  more  according  to 
Plato’s  pattern,  Thomas  Campanella,  flourished 
about  a century  after  More ; his  “ City  of  the 
Sun”  having  been  flrst  published  in  1623. 
This  man,  a learned  philosopher  of  Italy  and  a 
Dominican  monk,  incurred  the  jealousy  of  the 
Spaniards,  and  was  sentenced,  after  being  put 
seven  times  to  the  rack,  to  perpetual  imprison- 
ment; but  was  liberated  after  some  twenty-six 
years  of  conflnement,  and  spent  the  end  of  his 
life  in  France.  There  is  little  in  his  communis- 
tic scheme  that  is  worthy  of  notice,  and  it  has  had 
little  influence  on  the  minds  of  men  disposed  to 
speculate  in  that  direction.  In  fact,  it  has  been 
rescued  from  oblivion  only  in  comparatively  re- 
cent times.  As  another  has  remarked:  “The 
monastery  is  the  type  of  the  social  organization 
which  he  extols  ; the  pontifical  power  and  the 
ecclesiastical  hierarchy  serve  as  the  basis  of  the 
government  of  his  new  society.”  The  two  main 
points  of  his  system  are  community  of  property 
and  of  wives,  and  a government  lodged  in  the 
hands  of  philosophers ; in  both  of  which  he  fol- 
lows Plato.  In  regard  to  the  first,  he  perceives  the 
connection  between  the  abolition  of  private  prop- 
erty and  the  abolition  of  the  family.  He  says, 
in  a passage  which  I borrow  from  another,  that 
“ the  spirit  of  property  increases  among  us  only 
because  we  have  each  a house,  a wife,  and  children 
of  our  own.  Thence  comes  selfishness,  for,  in 


94  COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

order  to  raise  a son  to  honors  and  riches  and  to 
make  him  heir  of  a great  fortune,  we  dilapidate 
the  public  treasure,  if  we  can  control  others  by 
our  wealth  and  power ; or,  if  we  are  feeble,  poor, 
and  of  an  obscure  family,  we  become  avaricious, 
])erfidious,  hypocrites.”  And,  in  carrying  out  this 
kind  of  community,  he  follows  Plato  in  endeavor- 
ing to  improve  the  breed  of  men  by  measures  of 
government,  expressing  his  astonishment  that 
races  of  animals  should  receive  attention  in  this 
respect,  while  the  race  of  men  is  neglected. 

Campanella  carries  his  dread  of  property  even 
beyond  the  points  above  spoken  of.  Ko  one  has 
a fixed  abode.  Every  six  months  the  magistrates 
determine  the  district  or  circle,  the  house  and 
chamber,  which  each  one  is  to  occupy ; apparent- 
ly^, lest  there  should  be  any  local  attachments,  any 
home  feeling.  All  the  mechanic  arts  are  common 
to  both  sexes.  All  products  are  distributed  by 
the  magistrates  in  proportion  to  each  one’s  needs. 
As  for  the  amount  of  these  needs,  since  the  in- 
habitants all  take  a vow  of  frugality  and  poverty, 
and  it  is  assumed  by  Campanella  that  four  hours’ 
work  daily  will  be  adequate  for  their  supply,  they 
cannot  be  very  great. 

The  magistrates  in  this  republic  are  all  to  be 
philosophers,  according  to  Plato’s  noted  words,  in 
the  Kepublic,”  that  until  kings  become  philoso- 
phers, or  philosophers  become  kings,  there  can  be 
no  end  of  evils  in  political  communities.  The  su- 


COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 


95 


preme  magistrate  is  the  most  eminent  philosopher 
in  the  City  of  the  Sun,  and  has  the  title  of  the 
Sun,  or  the  great  metaphysician.  Under  him 
three  magistrates— answering  to  the  three  attri- 
butes of  power,  wisdom,  and  love  in  the  individ- 
ual man — preside  respectively  over  war,  over 
science,  and  over  industry  and  the  arts.  Under 
these,  and  chosen  by  them,  there  is  a great  body 
of  officers,  distinguished  for  some  kind  of  knowl- 
edge, and  chosen  by  the  great  metaphysician  and 
his  three  ministers.  They  are  invested  with  very 
great  executive  powers,  with  vdiich  the  religious 
authority  also,  even  that  of  holding  auricular  con- 
fession, is  united.  Thus  a thorough  despotism, 
the  only  government  possible  in  a communistic 
society,  if  it  can  subsist,  is  established. 

Why  he  should  want  a religious  autocrat  for 
his  Utopia  we  can  explain ; but  his  union  of  the 
two  powers,  so  contrary  to  Catholic  doctrine,  his 
doctrine  of  marriage,  so  un-Christian,  and  the 
modicum  of  freedom  provided  for  his  republic, 
when  he  suffered  so  much  from  despotism  him- 
self, make  him  a rare  specimen  in  the  history  of 
philosophers. 


96  COMMUNISTIC  THEOEIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 


II 

COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  IN  FRANCE— MARLY— MORELLY-— 
BARCEUP’S  CONSPIRACY. 

The  middle  of  the  last  century  was  the  time 
when  socialism,  only  a dream  or  the  animating 
spirit  of  a small,  secluded  society  before,  began  to 
proclaim  itself  to  the  world  as  the  true  and  just 
foundation  of  communities  made  up  of  living 
men.  It  was  in  France  that  words  sought  first  to 
become  deeds ; that  inexperience  and  mere  theory 
ventured  on  experiments  which  were  of  value  to 
the  world,  but  ruinous  to  those  who  made  them. 

Why  France  took  the  lead  in  the  new  move- 
ments of  thought  which  mark  the  last  century, 
and  why  these  movements  ended  in  the  most 
memorable  of  revolutions  are  questions  which  we 
must  pass  by.  Here  we  can  only  say  that  bold, 
inexperienced  thought,  misgovernment,  feebleness 
of  the  executive,  and  great  corruption  in  society 
came  into  the  field  of  action  together.  In  bring- 
ing about  the  result,  theories  of  society  and  of 
personal  rights  had  as  much  weight  in  the  scale 
as  any  other  of  the  concurring  causes. 

The  socialistic  tendencies  of  this  age  cannot,  I 
think,  be  laid  principally  at  Rousseau’s  door.  As 
I understand  his  views  in  the  “social  contract,” 
the  individual  in  a state  of  nature  makes  an  abso- 
lute surrender  of  what  he  has  and  of  himself  in 


COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  97 


order  to  form  the  political  body.  Because  all  do 
it  alike,  complete  equality  and  reciprocity  reign 
in  the  community.  But  before  the  surrender  eacli 
had  his  own  goods,  and  thus  property  was  not 
the  creation  of  the  state.  Eousseau,  then,  w^as  no 
communist  in  the  strictest  sense ; but  the  notion 
of  equality  might  easily  be  perverted  so  as  to 
mean  equality  of  possessions,  and  the  entire  sur- 
render of  the  individual,  with  no  restrictions  on 
the  action  of  the  state,  would,  of  course,  involve 
the  possibility  of  any  kind  of  absolutism ; of  one, 
for  instance,  under  which  private  property  would 
cease  and  community  of  goods  be  established. 
And  this  might  easily  be  the  course  of  a revolu- 
tion such  as  that  of  France  in  the  last  century. 

If  Eousseau  cannot  be  numbered  among  the 
communistic  writers,  strictly  so  called,  two  of  his 
contemporaries,  Mably  and  Morelly — the  first  more 
a dreamer,  the  second  of  a more  practical  spirit — 
deserve  that  title.  Eousseau  complained  that 
Mably  copied  him,  without  shame  or  stint.  But 
the  case  seems  to  be  that  Mably’s  principal  opin- 
ions rest  rather  on  Plato  than  on  any  modern  pre- 
decessor. It  also  appears  that  Mably  changed  his 
views  in  the  course  of  his  literary  life.  In  his 
earlier  writings  he  shows  a preference  for  arbi- 
trary power.  In  his  later  ones,  he  has  changed 
in  most  important  respects  ; in  fact,  his  theory  of 
society  has  altered.  And  this  was  an  honest 
change  in  his  own  mind ; for^  being  of  a distin- 
5 


98  COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

guislied  family,  employed  in  the  government, 
with  good  prospects  before  him,  he  withdrew 
from  public  occupations,  to  lead  the  life  of  an 
author  and  a scholar.  It  is  noteworthy  that  he  was 
a brother  of  Condillac,  although  very  much  older. 

In  the  social  theory  of  Mably,  inequality  of 
condition  is  the  great  evil  in  the  world.  lie 
says : “ Since  the  time  that  we  have  been  so  un- 
fortunate as  to  conceive  of  great  landed  estates 
and  differences  of  condition;  avarice,  ambition, 
vanity,  envy,  jealousy  take  their  place  in  our 
hearts,  to  lacerate  us,  to  invade  the  government 
of  states  and  to  tyrannize  over  them.  Establish 
community  of  goods,  and  then  nothing  is  easier 
tlian  to  establish  equality  of  conditions,  and  on 
this  double  foundation  to  secure  the  welfare  of 
men.” 

He  answers  the  objection  that  men  will  not 
work  without  a personal  motive,  by  admitting 
that  the  desire  of  property  inspires  the  spirit  of 
and  the  taste  for  labor ; but  replies  that  in  our 
corruption  we  know  only  the  personal  motive  for 
industry,  and  so  we  conceive  that  nothing  can  sup- 
ply its  place.  The  toil  which  is  a burden  to  la- 
borers would  be  only  a delicious  amusement  if  all 
men  had  a share  in  it.” 

Mably  read  history  badly.  lie  appeals  to  Sparta 
as  happy  in  a community  of  goods.  But  if  there 
ever  was  in  Sparta  an  equal  division  of  land  be- 
tween the  first  Doric  conquerors,  all  this  had 


COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  99 

ceased  before  Aristotle’s  time ; and,  in  fact,  the 
system  rested  originally  and  always,  on  a multi- 
tude of  Helots,  who  were  public  slaves,  and  on  a 
mass  of  inhabitants  below  the  grade  of  privileged 
citizens. 

Mably  was  a theorist  who  shrunk  back  from  the 
practical  application  of  his  own  theories.  The  es- 
tablishment of  community  of  goods,  and  even  of 
equality  of  fortunes,  he  dared  not  advocate.  The 
evil,”  he  says,  is  too  inveterate  for  the  hope  of 
a cure.”  And  so  he  advised  half  measures — agra- 
rian laws  fixing  the  maximum  of  landed  estates, 
and  sumptuary  laws  regulating  expenses.  Yet, 
with  his  great  reading  and  acquaintance  with  his- 
tory, he  must  have  well  known  that  sumptuary 
laws  have  been  always  ineffectual  against  the 
taste  for  extravagance  and  self-indulgence. 

Morelly,  whose  principal  works  are  a communis- 
tic poem,  called  The  Basiliade  ” (1753)  and  “ The 
Code  of  Nature”  (1755),  is  called  by  a French 
writer  one  of  the  most  obscure  authors  of  the  last 
century.  But  he  knew  what  he  wanted,  and  had 
courage  to  tell  it  to  others.  His  work  seems  to 
have  lain  unnoticed  for  some  time  and  was  as- 
cribed to  Diderot ; but,  when  the  time  was  ready 
for  it,  it  had  vastly  more  effect  than  all  the  learn- 
ing and  theory  of  Mably,  who  was  a number  of 
years  after  him  in  his  authorship. 

Morelly’s  power  on  subsequent  opinion  consists 
in  his  being  the  first  to  put  dreams  or  theories 


100  COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

into  a code  ; from  which  shape  it  seemed  easy  to 
fanatical  minds  to  carry  it  out  into  action.  Ilis 
starting-point  is  that  men  can  be  made  good  or 
evil  by  institutions.  Private  property,  or  avarice 
called  out  by  it,  is  the  source  of  all  vice.  ‘‘  Hence, 
where  no  property  existed  there  would  appear  none 
of  its  pernicious  consequences.’’  He  meets  the 
objection  that  personal  interest  is  a most  power- 
ful motive  to  human  action  by  asserting  that 
^4dleness  is  produced  by  arbitrary  institutions, 
which  give  to  some  men  a permanent  state  of  re- 
pose, which  is  called  prosperity  or  fortune,  and 
leave  for  others  labor  and  hardship.  These  dis- 
tinctions have  led  the  former  into  indolence  and 
effeminacy,  and  have  inspired  the  others  with 
aversion  and  disgust  toward  forced  duties.” 

His  fundamental  laws  of  human  society  are: 
First,  That  nothing  in  society  shall  belong  sepa- 
rately or  in  proprietorship  to  any  one,  except 
those  things  that  are  in  daily  use,  either  for  his 
wants,  his  pleasures,  or  his  daily  labor. 

Second,  That  every  citizen  shall  be  a public 
man,  sustained,  maintained,  and  employed  at  the 
public  expense. 

Third,  That  every  citizen,  for  his  part,  shall 
contribute  to  the  benefit  of  the  public,  according 
to  his  strength,  talents,  and  age.  On  this  princi- 
ple, his  duties  shall  be  adjusted  according  to  dis- 
tributive laws.  The  laws  divide  the  people  by 
families,  tribes,  cities,  and  provinces.  In  order 


COMMUNISTIC  THEOKIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  101 


to  avoid  accumulation,  they  prohibit  all  sale  and 
exchange;  they  require  every  citizen  to  till  the 
land  between  the  ages  of  twenty  and  twenty-five ; 
they  make  marriage  imperative  as  soon  as  a mar- 
riageable age  is  reached,  and  allow  no  man  to  live 
single  until  after  the  age  of  forty;  they  provide 
for  a common  education  of  all  children,  after  the 
age  of  five,  in  great  public  schools ; and  require 
that  superiors  in  the  mechanic  arts  shall  give  in- 
struction to  those  who  are  under  them  in  morals 
and  a kind  of  vague  deism. 

Rotation  in  ofiice  is  the  leading  feature  of  Mo- 
relly’s  plan  of  government.  Every  family  in  turn 
gives  a head  to  the  tribe  of  which  it  is  a part ; 
every  tribe,  in  its  turn,  appoints  the  magistrate  of 
the  tribe,  and  so  of  the  cities.  The  heads  of  tribes, 
however,  and  of  the  whole  state  hold  their  offices 
for  life. 

The  penal  laws  contain  the  article  that  who- 
ever, of  whatever  rank,  shall  endeavor  to  intro- 
duce ‘^detestable  property”  shall,  after  being 
convicted  and  judged  by  the  supreme  senate,  be 
shut  up  for  life,  as  a madman  and  an  enemy  of 
humanity,  in  a cavern  built  in  the  place  for  pub- 
lic burial.  His  name  shall  be  left  out  of  the  regis- 
ter of  the  citizens ; his  children  and  family  shall 
give  up  his  name,  and  shall  be  separately  incor- 
porated in  other  tribes,  cities,  or  provinces.  As 
Alfred  Sudre,  to  whom  I have  been  much  in- 
debted in  this  paper,  remarks : although  labor  is 


102  COMMUNISTIC  THEOKIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

to  become  so  very  agreeable  after  property  ceases 
to  exist,  Morelly  seems  to  think  that  this  great 
enemy  will  still  have  some  friends  left. 

The  feeling  that  all  men  are  equal  led  insensi- 
bly to  the  feeling  that  all  inequalities  must  be 
eradicated  out  of  society.  In  order  to  justify  this 
feeling,  property  must  be  shown  to  be  an  artifi- 
cial institution,  which  a righteous  state,  or  even  a 
spoliation  of  the  v>^eaker  by  the  stronger,  may 
abolish.  In  1782,  Brissot  de  Warville  invented 
the  phrase,  used  afterward  by  Proudhon,  Pro- 
priete  dest  le  vol^  and  even  justified  the  temporary 
unions  of  the  sexes  found  among  races  of  men 
nearest  to  brutes.  Twelve  years  afterward  a war 
against  the  rich  began,  and  such  measures  as  a 
maximum  of  property  and  the  abolition  of  the 
right  to  make  a will  were  agitated.  But  the 
right  of  property  prevailed,  and  grew  stronger 
after  each  new  revolution.  In  1796  the  conspir- 
acy of  the  Equals,  or,  as  it  is  generally  called,  of 
Babceuf,  was  the  final  and  desperate  measure  of  a 
portion  of  those  Jacobins  who  had  been  stripped 
by  the  fall  of  Robespierre  (in  1794)  of  political 
power.  It  was  the  last  hope  of  the  extreme  revo- 
lutionists, for  men  were  getting  tired  of  agita- 
tions and  wanted  rest. 

This  conspiracy  seems  to  have  been  foniented 
by  Jacobins  in  prison ; and  it  is  said  that  one  of 
them,  who  was  a believer  in  Morelly  and  had  his 
work  in  his  hands,  expounded  its  doctrines  to  his 


COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  103 


fellow-prisoner,  Baboeuf.  When  they  were  set  at 
liberty  by  an  amnesty  law,  there  was  a successful 
effort  made  to  bring  together  the  society  or  sect 
of  the  Equals ; but  it  was  found  that  they  wei'e 
not  all  of  one  mind.  Baboeuf  was  for  thorough 
measures — for  a community  of  goods  and  of  labor, 
an  equality  of  conditions  and  of  comforts.  Anto- 
nelli,  who  had  been  a member  of  the  Legislative 
Assembly,  was  for  laws  restricting  property  by  a 
maximum  and  for  other  half  measures.  He 
thought  that  extreme  measures  would  only  de- 
stroy, without  rebuilding ; but  he  finally  yielded 
to  the  views  and  plans  of  his  associates.  There 
was  a secret  committee  of  the  society  of  the 
Equals,  as  well  as  an  open  society.  The  latter 
excited  the  suspicion  of  the  Directory,  and  an 
order  was  given  to  suspend  its  sessions  in  the 
Pantheon  (or  Church  of  St.  Genevieve).  The 
order  was  executed  by  Bonaparte,  then  general  of 
the  army  of  the  interior,  who  dispersed  the  mem- 
bers and  put  a seal  on  the  doors  of  the  place  of 
meeting.  Next  the  Equals  won  over  a body  of 
the  police  into  their  measures;  and,  when  this 
force  was  disbanded  by  the  Directory,  the  Equals 
established  a committee  of  public  safety.  The 
committee  was  successful  in  bringing  as  many  as 
sixty  of  the  ^ party  of  the  mountain  into  their 
ranks,  and  an  insurrection  was  projected.  Seven- 
teen thousand  fighting  men  were  calculated  upon 
by  the  conspirators  as  at  their  disposal.  But  an 


104  COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

officer  of  the  army  whom  they  had  tried  to  bring 
into  their  plots  denounced  them  to  the  Directory. 
The  leading  conspirators  were  arrested.  Baboeuf 
and  Dai  the  suffered  death,  and  five  others  were 
banished.  One  of  the  most  ferocious  of  the  sect, 
Sylvain  Marechal,  a fanatical  atheist,  who,  accord- 
ing to  Taine,  erected  atheism  into  a compulsory 
dogma  and  a superior  duty,”  had  written  a mani- 
festo for  the  occasion,  in  which  he  says:  ‘^We 
wish  real  equality  or  death.  The  French  Ke vo- 
lution is  only  the  precursor  of  another,  much 
greater,  more  solemn,  and  the  final  one.  Let  all 
the  arts  perish,  if  need  be,  provided  real  equality 
remains  for  us.”  He  disclaims  the  maximum^  or 
agrarian  laws,  as  being  the  project  of  some  sol- 
diers without  principle,  and  of  bodies  of  people 
without  reason,  and  then  adds:  “We  aim  at 
something  more  sublime  and  more  equitable — 
the  common  good,  or  the  community  of  goods. 
K'o  more  individual  property  in  lands.  The 
land  belongs  to  no  person.  We  demand,  we 
seek  the  common  enjoyment  of  the  fruits  of 
the  soil.  The  fruits  are  for  all  the  world.” 

Buonarotti,  an  Italian,  wlio  belonged  to  the 
insurrectional  committee  above  spoken  of,  pub- 
lished in  1828,  after  long  years  of  exile,  a project 
of  an  economical  decree,  so  called,  which  reveals 
the  special  plans  of  the  Equals  for  the  new  organ- 
ization of  France  which  they  had  in  view.  Some 
of  the  provisions  of  this  project  are  that  all  prop- 


COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  105 


erty  of  living  persons,  when  they  die,  is  to  form 
a part  of  the  national  community  of  goods,  which 
all  the  members  of  society  are  to  manage.  The 
community  gives  to  all  that  of  which  they  have 
need ; but,  in  the  transition  state,  no  one  can 
hold  any  office  who  is  not  a member  of  the  com- 
munity. Every  member  under  si^ty  is  required 
to  work  on  the  land  or  in  some  useful  art.  The 
citizens  everywhere  are  divided  into  classes,  cor- 
responding with  the  useful  arts ; and  the  work  in 
each  district  or  commune  is  performed  under  the 
supervision  of  magistrates  elected  by  the  workmen 
in  each  class  or  description  of  industry.  These 
chiefs  of  divisions  of  labor  store  away  such  fruits 
of  the  soil  and  of  the  arts  as  will  bear  keeping,  and 
distribute  wffiat  is  laid  up  in  the  magazines  to  the 
people  of  the  place,  according  to  their  necessities. 
All  machines  are  furnished  by  the  general  com- 
munity; transport  is  under  the  direction  of  the 
magistrates ; taxes  are  payable  in  kind ; no  money 
is  to  be  coined ; and  whatever  money  comes  to 
the  national  community  is  to  be  used  in  foreign 
trade.  The  magistrates  may  transport  workmen 
from  one  place  of  work  to  another,  if  it  is  neces- 
sary, and  may  impose  forced  work  on  the  lazy. 

This  project  is  interesting,  because,  in  its  lead- 
ing features,  it  anticipates  the  newest  plans  of 
German  socialists  in  a number  of  important  par- 
ticulars. It  did  hot  aim  at  instantaneous  expro- 
priation, owing,  no  doubt,  to  the  certain  failure 
5* 


106  COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

of  SO  bold  an  attempt.  The  attainment  of  the 
same  end  by  abolishing  inheritance  was  judged  to 
be  less  hazardous. 

The  conspiracy  of  Baboeuf  was  a great  blessing. 
During  the  Empire  and  for  a generation  after  its 
fall,  there  was,  we  believe,  no  serious  attempt  to 
dissolve  social  order ; but  there  was  under  the 
Bourbons  a communistic  or  semi-communistic 
literature  arising  in  France  which  we  cannot 
wholly  pass  by,  for  at  length  it  leavens  the  multi- 
tude and  threatens  the  foundations  of  society. 


III. 

THEORIES,  ETC.,  OP  COMMUNISM— ST.  SIMON  AND  HIS 
FOLLOWERS— FOURIER. 

The  ways  of  thinking  or  schools  that  arose  in 
France  having  social  questions  for  their  object,  in 
and  soon  after  the  first  third  of  the  present  cen- 
tury, could*  not,  in  the  strict  sense,  be  all  termed 
communistic  or  socialistic.  We  are  not  called, 
therefore,  in  the  discussion  of  socialism,  to  con- 
sider them  particularly ; nor  can  we  go  into  the 
history  of  them  and  do  justice  to  the  prominence 
which  'some  of  their  authors  reached.  Nor  did 
they  acquire  importance,  in  any  great  degree,  by 
going  beyond  the  region  of  theory  and  imagina- 
tion into  the  sober  domain  of  experiment.  If  in 
a few  cases  they  did  tliis,  the  result  was  a failure. 


COMMUNISTIC  theorip:s  and  utopias.  107 


as  in  the  instances  where  Cabet’s  speculations  and 
a modified  Fourierism  sought  a home  within  the 
United  States.  Yet,  as  they  adopted  the  princi- 
ples of  earlier  communistic  writers  or  gave  new 
directions  to  communistic  thinking,  they  need 
here  a brief  exposition.  One  of  the  first  of  these 
was  St.  Sirnonism,  or  the  speculations  of  St. 
Simon,  modified  or  corrupted  afterward  by  En- 
fantin  and  Bazard.  The  founder  of  the  school 
was  a member  of  the  noble  family  to  which  the 
duke  of  the  same  name,  author  of  important  me- 
moirs published  in  recent  times  and  a courtier 
under  Louis  XIY.,  belonged.  The  Count  de  St. 
Simon  served  in  our  Revolutionary  War  in  the 
French  army,  while  very  young,  and  ended  a life 
of  misfortune  and  poverty  in  1825,  a month  after 
the  publication  of  his  Nouveaiv  ChristianismsP 
In  this  work  he  aimed  at  a new  organization  of 
Christianity,  which  was  reduced  to  fraternity, 
with  very  little  of  its  dogma  left.  All  society,” 
he  taught,  ‘‘ought  to  labor  for  the  amelioration 
of  the  moral  and  physical  existence  of  the  poor- 
est class.  Society  ought  to  organize  itself  in  a 
way  best  fitted  for  reaching  this  great  end.”  In 
regard  to  the  rewards  of  industrial  employments, 
his  motto  was:  “To  each  one  according  to  his 
capacity ; to  each  capacity  according  to  its  work  ” 
— ^which  is  very  far  from  being  a communistic 
principle. 

The  school  of  St.  Simon  at  the  time  of  the 


108  COlVmUNISTIG  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

July  Revolution  (in  1830),  five  years  after  his 
death,  was  attacked  by  misrepresentations  which 
they  endeavored  to  refute  in  a letter  addressed  to 
the  President  of  the  Chamber  of  Deputies.  The 
attacks  touched  three  points:  the  community  of 
goods,  the  community  of  women,  and  connection 
with  democratic  societies.  These  attacks  pro- 
ceeded from  Messrs.  Maguin  and  Dupin,  impor- 
tant members  of  the  Chamber. 

In  ansv/er,  they  admit  that  the  St.  Simonists 
profess  doctrines  concerning  the  future  of  prop- 
erty and  the  future  of  women  which  are  peculiar 
to  them,  and  are  connected  with  equally  peculiar 
and  entirely  new  views  concerning  religion,  politi- 
cal power,  and  freedom ; in  short,  concerning  all 
the  great  enigmas  which  are  at  present  making  a 
stir  over  all  Europe  in  a violent  and  extraordinary 
way.  But  these  ideas  of  theirs  are  far  different 
from  those  which  are  imputed  to  them.” 

As  to  community  of  goods,  they  declare  that 
to  attempt  the  introduction  of  this  “ would  be 
a greater  act  of  violence,  a more  outrageous  in- 
justice than  the  unequal  division  which  originally 
was  brought  about  by  the  power  of  arms  and  by 
conquest.”  They  could  not  hold  to  this : for 
they  believe  in  the  natural  inequality  of  men,” 
and  think  that  such  community  would  violate 
the  first  of  all  moral  laws  which  they  are  sent  to 
propagate — that  in  future  every  one  should  have 
his  place  according  to  his  capacity  and  be  reward- 


COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  109 


ed  according  to  his  works.”  Yet,  in  conformity 
with  this  law,  tliey  demand  the  aholition  of  all 
privileges  of  birth,  without  exception ; and,  hence, 
the  destruction  of  inheritance,  the  greatest  of  all 
privileges.” 

As  to  the  position  of  woman,  they  say  that 
^^Christianity  drew  woman  out  of  slavery;  but 
still  condemned  her  to  subjection.”  The  St.  Si- 
monists  are  come  to  announce  her  final  freedom, 
her  complete  emancipation ; but  without,  on  that 
account,  destroying  the  holy  law  of  marriage, 
which  is  proclaimed  by  Christianity.  They  de- 
mand, like  the  Christians,  that  one  man  be  united 
to  one  woman ; but  they  teach  that  the  woman 
shall  stand  on  an  equality  with  the  husband,  and 
that,  according  to  the  grace  which  God  has  spe- 
cially poured  on  her  sex,  she  be  united  to  him  in 
the  triple  function  of  temple,  state,  and  family, 
so  that  the  social  individual,  which  until  now  has 
been  the  man  alone,  shall  become  in  future  the 
man  and  the  woman. 

The  charge  that  they  are  allied  with  the  exist- 
ing democratic  clubs,  they  deny,  so  far  as  to  say 
that,  although  they  have  sympathy  with  these 
movements,  their  own  work  is  of  another  kind — 
not  destructive  nor  violent,  but  reformatory,  and 
constructive  of  a new  society  in  peaceful  and  re- 
ligious ways. 

Not  long  after  this  defensive  letter  was  pre- 
sented to  the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  a schism  be- 


110  COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOriAS. 

gan  between  the  two  successors  of  St.  Simon — 
Bazard  and  Enfantin.  Bazard,  who  had  intro- 
duced the  society  of  Carbonari  into  France,  was 
interested  in  the  social  problems  which  St.  Simon 
left  almost  untouched.  They  all  believed  in 
some  kind  of  equality  of  men.  How  can  this  be 
united  with  inequality  of  property?  Is  there 
any  absolute  right  to  property  ? To  this  he  gave, 
if  not  a new  answer,  at  least  one  more  thorough- 
ly considered  than  it  had  been  by  St.  Simon : that 
acquired  property  is  truly  such,  but  transmitted 
property  rests  only  on  positive  law.  This  would 
lead  to  the  abolition  of  inheritance.  How,  then, 
should  lapsed  inheritances  be  disposed  of  by  the 
state  ? He  solved  the  problem  by  a system  of 
banks,  which  formed  a sort  of  magistracy,  em- 
pow^ered  to  find  the  persons  best  qualified  to  take 
care,  through  their  lives,  of  estates  thus  revert- 
ing to  the  public.  There  would  thus  be  not 
strictly  a community  of  goods  ; but  a distribution 
by  the  state,  according  to  the  capacity  of  per- 
sons to  manage  what  was  put  into  their  hands. 
And  so,  on  the  death  of  each  tenant,  the  turn 
of  some  other,  well  fitted  for  the  work,  would 
come. 

Enfantin,  the  other  leader  of  the  sect,  appears 
to  have  been  a conceited,  selfish  man ; and  it 
seems  probable  that  he  became  imbued  with  some 
of  the  views  of  Fourier  relating  to  the  intercourse 
of  the  sexes.  But,  however  this  may  be,  the  idea 


COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  Ill 


of  the  rehabilitation  or  reinstatement  in  its  rights 
of  the  flesh  was  unknown  to  St.  Simon  or  Ba- 
zard.  When  Enfantin  avowed  this  as  his  doc- 
trine, Bazard  left  the  hall  and  did  not  appear 
there  again.  He  died  not  long  after.  Others  of 
the  school — Pierre  Leroux,  for  instance — soon  fol- 
lowed ; and,  to  save  it  from  total  destruction,  En- 
fantin  removed  to  a paternal  estate  in  the  coun- 
try. The  last  blow  the  school  received  came 
from  the  arrest  of  Enfantin  and  three  others,  one 
of  whom  was  Michael  Chevalier,  for  a violation 
of  the  penal  code.  They  were  imprisoned ; and, 
although  the  master  or  father,  as  they  called  him, 
lived  many  years  afterward,  he  and  his  work  fell 
into  entire  oblivion. 

An  important  writer  on  the  social  movement 
in  France,  L.  Stein,  thus  sums  up  what.  St.  Simon, 
as  the  leader  of  a new  school  of  thought,  accom- 
plished : He  flrst  pronounced  the  separation  of 
the  two  great  classes  of  industrial  society,  employ- 
ers and  workmen.  He  flrst  set  forth,  although 
obscurely,  social  reform  as  the  only  real  problem 
of  state  power.  He  flrst  put  the  question  con- 
cerning inheritance,  the  question  on  which  the 
entire  future  of  the  social  form  of  Europe  in  the 
next  two  generations  will  depend.  And,  Anally, 
with  St.  Simon,  society,  in  its  elements,  its  power, 
and  its  contradictions,  was  for  the  flrst  time  half 
understood,  half  dimly  conceived  of.  He  is  the 
boundary  stone  of  the  modern  time  in  France.” 


112  COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

St.  Simon  seems  not  to  liave  deserved  the  name 
of  a profound  thinker ; yet  he  and  his  successors 
drew  to  them  a number  of  young  men  who  after- 
ward distinguished  themselves  in  several  depart- 
ments. Buchez,  author  of  ‘‘  The  Parliamentary 
History  of  the  Revolution,”  and  of  a “ Treatise 
on  Politics,”  and  President  of  the  Constituent 
Assembly  in  1830,  was  one  of  them.  Pie,  with 
his  friend  Bolland,  left  the  school  when  Enfantin 
began  to  make  his  new  doctrines  known,  and  lie 
afterward  passed  over  into  a modified  Catholi- 
cism. Michael  Chevalier  was  another.  Auguste 
Comte  was  a third,  who  retained  some  of  the 
thoughts  of  the  school  in  his  philosophy.  We 
have  already  spoken  of  Pierre  Leroux  as  joining 
Hazard  in  the  schism  which  Enfantin  occasioned. 
Another  scholar,  less  known,  Olinde  Rodriguez, 
when  he  broke  loose  from  Enfantin,  was  accused 
by  him  of  heresy,  and  accused  him  in  turn.  I 
have  asserted,”  said  he,  “ that  in  the  family  of  St. 
Simon  every  child  must  know  who  his  father  is.” 
Enfantin  would  have  it  that  the  woman  alone 
should  be  called  to  decide  this  serious  question.” 
He  gave  to  the  world  several  publications  con- 
cerning the  schism. 

Fourier  may  come  next,  on  account  of  his  some- 
what near  relations  to  St.  Simonism ; but  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  school,  rather  than  to  that  of  the 
master.  He  was  destined  for  trade ; but,  losing 
his  property  early  in  his  life,  filled  inferior  posi- 


COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  113 


tions  with  little  success,  and  died,  at  the  age  of 
sixty-five,  in  1837.  He  began  to  write  early  in 
the  century.  His  principal  works  are  Theory 
of  the  Four  Movements”  and  ‘^Treatise  on  a 
Domestic  Rural  Association.”  In  another  publi- 
cation he  attacked  Owen  and  St.  Simon. 

Fourier,  like  St.  Simon,  separated  from  the 
communists  by  not  admitting  the  equality  of 
members  of  his  communities.  Talent  and  capi- 
tal are  to  receive  their  rewards,  as  well  as  work. 
A rule  of  his  gives  five-twelfths  of  the  product  to 
work,  three-twelfths  to  talent,  and  four-twelfths  to 
capital.  Work  itself  is  to  have  a larger  dividend 
according  as  it  is  repulsive  and  difficult.  He 
does  not  even  absolutely  cut  off  inheritance,  so 
that  a generation  of  property-holders  might  con- 
tinue in  his  establishments. 

Another  of  his  ideas  was  to  strive  to  make 
work  agreeable.  He  would  make  it  so  by  dis- 
tributing it  according  to  the  inclination  of  the 
workman,  by  allowing  him  to  engage  in  more 
than  one  employment,  and  by  stimulating  rival- 
ries between  persons  employed  in  different  occu- 
pations. The  existing  opinion  is  thoroughly 
wrong,  he  thinks,  in  expecting  from  men  moral 
self-control.  In  Fourier’s  system  every  one  may 
give  free  vent  to  his  sensitive  or  impassioned  na- 
ture ; and  the  result  is  a harmony  in  which  the 
poorest  may  have  more  enjoyment  than  kings. 
For  instance,  a friendly  rivalry  between  the  culti- 


114  COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

vators  of  a pear-orcliard  and  an  apple-orchard 
would  give  spice  to  their  employments. 

Fourier  would  gather  a large  number  of  per- 
sons in  a vast  building,  calculated  to  hold  from 
1,800  to  2,000  in  all.  Here  should  be  collected 
all  the  means  of  amusement  after  work  was 
ended,  and  all  should  have  liberty  to  partake  of 
them.  The  building — called  a phalanstery,  as  the 
community  is  called  a phalanx — could  be  con- 
structed at  a cheaper  rate  than  the  hovels  contain- 
ing the  same  number  of  poor  families.  This,  and 
the  larger  amount  of  work  turned  off,  owing  to 
the  pleasure  of  the  occupations,  would  greatly  in- 
crease enjo}m:ient  and  would  give  ample  time  to 
amusement.  Work  would  become  play  while  it 
lasted,  and  be  followed  by  a new  kind  of  play 
after  the  hours  of  work.  The  products  of  the 
phalanstery  and  its  dividends  would  show  a vast 
increase  of  profits  over  ordinary  systems  of  labor. 
He  professes  to  think  that  England  could  pay  off 
her  national  debt  by  henneries  and  raising  of  eggs 
in  half  a year  (Stein,  ii.,  506). 

This  is  the  ridiculous  side  of  the  system.  Of 
his  fantastic  natural  philosophy  we  shall  say  noth- 
ing. His  moral  philosophy  consisted  in  holding 
that  pleasure  was  the  chief  good ; that  natural 
desires  and  passions  were  to  be  gratified.  It  was 
on  this  basis  that  he  aimed  to  make  work  as  in- 
viting as  possible.  His  opinions  respecting  chas- 
tity and  conjugal  fidelity  fell  below  those  of  the 


COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  115 


degenerate  portion  of  St.  Simon’s  scholars.  I 
shall  not  be  guilty  of  an  exaggeration  if  I say 
that  they  admitted  into  his  system  something 
very  much  like  polyandry  and  polygamy. 


IV. 

CERTAIN  RELIGIOUS  SOCIALISTS— CARET— LOUIS  BLANC. 

St.  Simonism  manifested  the  feeling  that  the 
problem  of  the  regeneration  of  society  could  not 
be  solved  on  merely  social  grounds,  and  that  a 
foundation  of  religion  would  be  demanded  by 
many  earnest  minds.  Lamennais  was  one  of 
these.  What  led  him  onward  from  his  first  posi- 
tion of  a Catholic  preacher  of  righteousness,  to 
that  of  breaking  with  his  church  and  of  becoming 
a sort  of  tribune  of  the  people,  was  the  spirit  of 
fraternity  and  sympathy  with  the  lower  class. 
At  length,  in  1838,  in  a book  called  the  “ Livre 
du  Peujple^'*  he  almost  reached  community  of 
goods.  He  there  says : “ That  which  begets  dis- 
sensions, hatred,  envy,  is  the  insatiable  desire  of 
possessing  more  and  always  more,  when  one  pos- 
sesses for  himself  alone.  Providence  curses  these 
solitary  possessions.  They  stimulate  covetousness 
without  ceasing,  and  satisfy  it  never.  There  is 
no  enjoyment  in  goods,  unless  they  are  divided.” 
And  again : From  the  holy  maxims  of  equality, 


116  COMMUNISTIC  THEOKIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

liberty,  and  fraternity,  immovably  established,  the 
organization  of  society  will  emanate.” 

Another  form,  in  which  this  religion  of  frater- 
nity appeared,  has  been  called  the  theosopliic^  and 
it  showed  itself  in  the  minds  of  religious  dreamers, 
who  were  half  Christians,  with  a governing  spirit 
of  demagogy.  The  Abbe  Constant  was  one  of 
these.  He  says  that  “ God  is  everything  and 
everything  is  God,  and  that  a gi’ain  of  sand  is 
God,”  perhaps  having  no  definitely  pantheistic 
meaning  in  this.  He  says  again : Nothing  on 
the  earth  belongs  to  this  or  that  man.  All  be- 
longs to  God.  That  is  to  say,  to  all.”  Here, 
too,  he  may  have  no  definite  notion  of  what  he  is 
saying ; but  when  he  says,  the  community  will  be 
the  perfect  society,  he  means  what  communists 
mean.  This  man  is  said  by  Stein  to  have  taught 
that  in  a good  time  coming  marriage  would  cease  ; 
that  a man  and  woman  should  unite  without  re- 
serve, and  the  birth  of  a child  should  constitute 
the  marriage ; and,  since  God  is  love,  if  love  did 
not  last  in  such  marriage,  it  came  forthwith  to  an 
end.  Another  such  man  is  one  Esquiros,  who 
wrote  the  “People’s  Gospel”  and  the  “People’s 
Gospel  Defended,”  in  1840,  1841,  and  says  that 
“ the  community  is  altogether  in  the  spirit  of 
Christianity,  and  that  the  doctrine  of  Christ  is  the 
enemy  of  most  governments,  as  they  are  at  pres- 
ent constituted.” 

We  pass  from  these  to  another  religious  writer, 


COMMUNISTIC  THKOBIKS  AND  UTOPIAS.  117 


who  oiTginally  belonged  to  the  sect  of  the  St. 
Simonists,  but  withdrew  when  Enfantin  revealed 
his  licentious  doctrines.  PieiTe  Leroux,  one  of 
the  most  learned  men  of  his  time,  estimable  and 
pure,  after  this  breach  with  his  friends,  gave  him- 
self up  to  learning  and  writing.  One  of  the 
products  was  a new  but  murky  and  fantastic  reli- 
gious philosophy.  Another  was  a social  system  in 
which  equality  was  the  foundation.  He  seems  to 
have  condemned  property ; yet  he  stopped,  like  his 
teacher,  St.  Simon,  short  of  the  strictest  systems 
of  communism. 

Two  of  his  scholars  have  given  a resume  of  his 
social  principles,  from  which  I will  cite  a few  pas- 
sages. Each  and  all  have  a right  to  property. 
Property  is  the  natural  right  of  every  one  to  use 
a determinate  thing  in  the  way  which  the  law 
points  out. 

Society,  the  collective  centre,  is  the  field  and 
place  of  labor  of  each  man  ; from  society  each  one 
borrows  the  science  he  applies,  the  instruments  he 
employs,  the  materials  he  transforms.  It  is  so- 
ciety, in  fact,  which  furnishes  him  with  all  his 
means  of  production.  In  eveiy  fact  of  produc- 
tion, the  social  centre,  as  a whole,  has  a concern, 
under  the  title  of  detaining  in  its  possession  the 
instruments  of  labor  and  the  primary  materials, 
under  the  title  of  suggester  of  thoughts  and  mo- 
tives, and  under  that  of  dividing  up  products 
and  means  of  work.  Labor  is  demanded  by 


118  COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

society  from  the  industrial  man,  the  artist,  the 
scholar.” 

Society  divides  up  by  its  administrative  power, 
products  and  means  of  labor  of  all  kinds.  The 
formula  of  rewarding  the  various  labors  is  to  each 
according  to  his  capacities,  to  his  labor,  to  his  needs. 

In  this  scheme  everything  is  communistic  ex- 
cept the  plan  of  rewarding  the  laborers,  which  is 
borrowed  from  St.  Simon. 

We  come  next  to  a more  pronounced  commu- 
nist, Etienne  Cabet,  wdio  was  by  profession  an 
advocate,  and  in  politics  was,  at  the  time  of  the 
Bourbon  restoration,  a very  decided  radical.  In 
1834,  being  compromised  in  a revolt,  he  went  as 
an  exile  to  England,  and  there  employed  his  lei- 
sure in  studying  social  problems.  One  of  the  fruits 
of  his  leisure  was  his  Yoyage  to  Icaria,”  a Uto- 
pia after  the  pattern  of  Sir  Thomas  More’s,  in 
three  parts.  The  first  part  describes  and  sets 
forth  a nation  in  the  communistic  condition ; the 
second  part  is  designed  to  show  how  such  a com- 
munity can  proceed  from  the  actual  state  of  a na- 
tion ; while  the  third  contains  a resume  of  the 
doctrine  or  principles  of  the  community.  Wish- 
ing to  carry  out  his  ideas,  he  crossed  the  Atlan- 
tic in  1848,  and  before  his  death,  at  St.  Louis,  in 
1856,  had  planted  his  colony.  The  colony  and 
other  subsequent  offshoots  have  been,  on  the 
whole,  unsuccessful,  and  we  must  believe  that  he 
had  no  gift  to  conduct  such  an  enterprise. 


COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  119 

About  1841  Cabet  published  his  communistic 
creed  in  Paris,  from  which  we  extract  a few  arti- 
cles, sometimes  abridged,  but  generally  in  a close 
translation  of  the  author’s  words : 

“ I believe  that  nature  has  intended  the  earth 
to  be  possessed  in  community  and  undivided,  like 
the  light,  heat,  and  air ; that  she  has  pointed  out 
division  only  for  production  and  things  indispen- 
sable for  the  needs  of  the  individual,  and  that 
community  is  the  most  natural  system.  I believe 
that  property  is  a purely  human  invention  and  in- 
stitution. I Tielieve  that  the  institution  can  be 
good  and  useful  only  in  case  the  earth  were  divid- 
ed among  all  men,  and  each  one  had  an  equal 
share,  which,  according  to  its  nature,  should  be 
inalienable.  I believe  that  the  acceptance  of  the 
right  of  property  among  all  nations,  in  connection 
with  its  inequality  and  alienability,  is  an  error, 
perhaps  the  most  disastrous  of  all  errors.” 
believe  that  the  evils  rising  from  private  property 
must  continue  whilst  its  cause  continues,  and  that, 
in  order  to  suppress  the  effect,  the  right  of  prop- 
erty must  cease.” 

In  respect  to  marriage,  his  faith  is  that  it  is  the 
relation  of  the  sexes  most  in  conformity  with  the 
dignity  of  our  nature,  and  the  best  calculated  to 
secure  individual  happiness  and  order  in  the  com- 
munity ; that  what  evils  attend  on  it  at  present 
will  disappear  when  equality  and  community  pre- 
vail ; and  that  all  men  not  only  ought  to  marry. 


120  COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

but  would  incline  so  to  do  when  the  community 
secured  to  them,  in  payment  for  moderate  work, 
the  necessary  means  of  subsistence.  So  also  the 
present  affection  between  parents  and  children, 
however  strong  it  might  be,  would  then  produce 
no  single  one  of  those  evils  which  it  creates  in  the 
present  system  of  inequality. 

Since  the  national  territory  belongs,  like  an  un- 
divided estate,  to  society,  society  or  its  representa- 
tives ought  to  take  care  of  it  and  see  to  its  culti- 
vation by  the  citizens,  that  they  should  collect  the 
fruits,  put  in  different  ateliey^s  all  that  is  necessary 
for  food,  clothing,  and  dwellings,  and  see  to  the 
distribution.  Such  a kind  of  cultivation  of  the 
soil,  he  believes,  would  have  for  its  result  the 
suppression  of  boundaries  between  the  fields  of 
neighbors,  the  cultivation  of  waste  lands,  far  bet- 
ter agriculture  and  economy,  together  with  a dou- 
ble, triple,  or  even  tenfold  amount  of  production. 

In  regard  to  industry  in  the  community,  his  be- 
lief is  that  society  ought  to  divide  and  direct 
work,  to  place  and  regulate  the  workshops  {ate- 
liers)^ and  to  distribute  the  workmen.  Machines 
in  a communistic  system  can  never  be  enough 
multiplied,  and  human  intelligence  must  find  the 
means  to  limit  the  office  of  the  workmen  to  the 
mere  management  of  them.  Every  tiling  possible 
must  be  done  to  make  work  as  easy  and  pleasant 
as  possible.  All  kinds  of  work  must  be  regarded 
to  be  alike  honorable.  All  citizens  must  be  work- 


COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  121 


men  ; every  one  must,  as  far  as  possible,  clioose  the 
profession  most  congenial  to  him ; and  all  must 
work  an  equal  number  of  hours.  believe,” 
he  says,  in  closing  this  article  of  his  creed  respect- 
ing industry,  that  such  a system  of  industry  will 
be  followed  by  the  avoidance  of  double  employ- 
ments and  losses,  by  great  savings,  and,  at  the  least, 
by  a tenfold  increase  of  fabrics.”  He  adds,  in  a 
subsequent  article:  “I  believe  that  the  opinion 
which  rejects  communism  as  a chimera  is  only  a 
prejudice,  and  must  yield  to  study  and  investiga- 
tion.” And,  on  the  important  point  how  this  sys- 
tem is  to  be  introduced,  he  declares  that  it  must 
not  come  in  by  force.  If  a minority,  against 
the  will  of  the  great  and  small  proprietors,  should 
seek  to  abolish  the  right  of  property,  and  to  force 
the  present  wealthy  class  to  work,  this  attempt, 
overthrowing  all  past  usage,  all  confidence  and  all 
existence,  would  meet  with  more  hindrances  than 
any  social  or  political  revolution  has  ever  had  to 
encounter.”  The  bare  resistance  presented  by 
sluggishness  would  be  enough  to  shipwreck  the 
project.  Only  public  opinion,  acting  through  the 
will  of  the  people,  with  the  consent  of  all,  or  at 
least  of  the  great  majority,  and  through  law,  can 
make  it  an  actual  institution.  And,  in  case  of  a 
popular  reform  or  revolution,  a transitional  or 
preparatory  political  form  would  be  necessary. 
Only  democracy  would  be  adequate  to  this  task 
of  introducing  communism  through  a system  by 


122  COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

which  inequalities  would  be  gradually  lessened 
and  equality  increased,  thus  making  the  road  open 
for  full  communism. 

Thus  Utopia  has  come  down  out  of  the  clouds 
and  planted  lier  feet  on  terra  firma.  Friendly 
argument,  peaceful  conference  can  make  all  her 
speculations  real  in  reference  to  the  greatest 
change  in  society  ever  contemplated  in  the  world. 
We  cannot  but  praise  M.  Cabet  for  the  kindly 
and  humane  spirit  of  his  creed ; but  benevolence 
and  the  regeneration  of  men,  with  no  forces  save 
nakedly  human  ones,  are  hardly  enough.  He  re- 
minds us  of  the  French  dancing-master  who  tried 
to  teach  wild  Indians  to  dance,  while  neither 
party  knew  the  dialect  of  the  other.  “ Messieurs 
Sauvages,”  said  he,  with  the  politeness  of  his 
country,  “ will  you  have  the  goodness  to  put  your- 
selves in  the  first  position  ? ’’ 

But  we  turn  to  a man  of  another  kind,  and  the 
last  Frenchman  whom  we  shall  include  in  these 
brief  sketches.  Louis  Blanc,  born  in  1813,  the 
youngest  among  the  more  important  socialists 
of  France,  and  still  living,  is  distinguished  by 
his  historical  writings ; and  was  so  prominent  in 
his  party  at  the  downfall  of  Louis  Philippe,  in 
1848,  that  he  was  chosen  a member  of  the  Pro- 
visional Government.  He  was,  however,  com- 
promised in  the  disturbances  of  May,  1848,  and,  to 
avoid  prosecution,  fied  to  England,  where  he  re- 
sided many  years.  Here  he  continued  and  com- 


COmiUNISTIO  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  123 


pleted  his  great  work  on  the  French  Revolution, 
in  twelve  volumes.  He  had  already  written  his 
^‘History  of  Ten  Years,”  and  his  ‘^Organization 
of  Labor,”  which  is  the  expression  of  his  social  or 
communistic  principles. 

His  social  starting-point  is  no  new  one.  “ It  is 
not  the  man  who  is  responsible  for  his  wrong- 
doings, but  society;  and,  hence,  a society  on  a 
good  basis  will  make  the  individual  man  good.” 
The  evils  of  slavery  flow  from  inequality,  and 
that  from  property.  Property,  then,  is  the  great 
scourge  of  society;  it  is  the  veritable  public 
crime.”  Government  should  be  considered  as  the 
supreme  regulator  of  production,  and  be  invested 
with  power  enough  to  accomplish  its  task.  It 
should  raise  money,  which  should  be  appropri- 
ated, without  payment  of  interest,  for  the  creation 
of  social  workshops  {ateliers)  in  the  most  important 
branches  of  national  industry.  In  these  work- 
shops the  operatives  should  choose  their  own 
overseers,  and  there  should  be  the  same  wages 
for  all.  They  should  form  a solidarity  among 
themselves,  and,  when  united  with  agricultural 
labor,  would  consolidate  in  one  the  whole  indus- 
try of  the  country.  The  enormous  sums  neces- 
sary for  this  organization  of  labor  could  in  part 
be  derived  from  the  abolition  of  collateral  inheri- 
tances. The  effect  of  thus  aiding  the  ateliers 
would  obviously  be  to  render  it  impossible  for 
private  undertakers  to  compete  with  the  national 


124:  COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS. 

shops.  Thus  concurrence  would  cease,  and  pri- 
vate work  yield  first  or  last  to  the  public  or  com- 
munistic system. 

In  1818  the  system  of  Louis  Blanc  was  so  far 
put  to  the  test  that  public  ateliers  were  opened, 
and  in  Paris  150,000  workmen  were  employed  in 
them,  at  a daily  expense  of  $50,000.  National 
ruin  was  near  if  the  system  should  continue. 
The  workmen  were  also  a dangerous  element  in 
the  population.  The  emeute  of  May,  and  that  of 
June  in  the  same  year,  1818,  in  which  many  of 
the  workmen  in  these  national  ateliers  took  part, 
furnished  a pretext  for  putting  an  end  to  the  ex- 
periment. 

Louis  Blanc  did  not  seek  to  interfere  with  the 
family.  But,  while  he  says  that  the  family  is  a 
natural  fact,  which  on  any  hypothesis  cannot  be 
destroyed,  he  adds  that  inheritance  has  a conven- 
tional character,  with  which  the  progress  of  soci- 
ety can  do  away.  The  family  comes  from  God ; 
inheritance  from  men.  The  family  is,  like  God, 
holy  and  immortal ; inheritance  is  destined  to  fol- 
low the  same  direction  which  societies  may  take 
in  their  transformation.” 

When  Louis  Blanc  encounters  the  objections 
made  to  the  destruction  of  the  social  system,  it  is 
by  the  reply  that  it  would  be  only  a transitory 
condition,  through  which  the  world  would  pass  to 
something  better.  He  did  not  say  much  on  com- 
munity of  goods;  but  his  organization  of  labor 


COMMUNISTIC  THEORIES  AND  UTOPIAS.  125 


took  its  place.  The  great  importance  of  what  he 
did,  lay  not  in  the  novelty  of  his  suggestions; 
but  in  his  bringing  the  minds  of  men  to  a practi- 
cal point,  where  the  transformation  of  society 
could  begin,  without  any  preparatory  overturning. 
He  had,  perhaps,  a greater  part  in  preparing  the 
way  for  the  German  socialism  than  any  other 
single  Frenchman. 


126 


THE  INTERNATIONAL 


CHAPTER  lY. 

THE  INTERNATIONAL  WORKINGMEN’S  ASSO- 
CIATION, 

I. 

With  the  progress  of  the  French  Revolution 
some  very  important  changes  made  their  way 
among  the  industrial  classes,  both  in  France  and 
in  other  parts  of  Europe.  In  France  the  peasant- 
ry, or  serfs  of  the  feudal  times,  became  to  a large 
extent  proprietors  of  small  farms,  and  now  con- 
stitute the  largest  class  of  independent  workmen 
in  the  nation.  In  the  towns  the  industry  of  the 
citizens,  or  bourgeoisie^  as  we  shall  call  them,  re- 
ceived a great  stimulus  from  the  new  freedom ; 
while  the  greater  use  and  cost  of  machinery  ren- 
dered it  increasingly  difficult  for  the  operative  to 
emerge  from  his  condition  into  that  of  an  em- 
ployer or  undertaker.  Meanwhile,  the  feeling  of 
equality,  stimulated  by  the  Revolution,  made  the 
operative  feel  that  he  was  depressed  below  his 
rightful  position — a feeling  which  was  rendered 
the  more  bitter  by  his  notion  of  equality,  as  im- 
plying equality  of  condition,  and  by  the  harping 


wokkingmen’s  association. 


127 


of  the  demagogues  on  this  string.  Thus  there 
grew  up,  almost  of  necessity,  a division  in  the 
working-class  of  the  towns  between  those  who 
formed  the  standing  hourgeoisie  and  the  proleta- 
riat^ as  the  agitators  delighted  to  call  the  stand- 
ing class  of  operatives ; meaning,  by  this  Koman 
term  for  the  lowest  class  in  that  republic,  those 
who  had  only  hands  to  work  with  and  no  laid-up 
capital.  This  strife  appears  in  the  earlier  part 
of  the  Revolution.  The  Directory,  when  Ba- 
boeuf’s  conspiracy  broke  out,  put  it  down,  as  an 
attack  on  capital,  which  might  destroy  both  the 
republic  and  the  property  which  was  necessary 
for  its  industrial  prosperity.  The  Directory  tri- 
umphed; but  the  alienation  between  labor  and 
capital  was  not  cured  and  is  not  in  the  process  of 
being  cured.  It  is  this  strife,  or  feeling  that  they 
have  separate  interests  from  the  hourgeoisie  and 
the  capitalists,  which  now  forms  the  strong  point 
for  agitation  everywhere,  wherever  industry  is 
flourishing;  which  gives  a force  to  communistic  , 
arguments ; which  enables  popular  leaders  to  con- 
solidate them  into  a class ; which  in  some  coun- 
tries clouds  the  prospect  for  the  future,  affects 
politics  in  a way  unknown  a century  ago,  and 
perplexes  the  most  adroit  of  statesmen. 

It  is  worthy  of  remark  how  this  strife  of  classes 
has  widened  the  breach  between  the  classes  in  the 
minds  of  the  parties  interested,  and,  to  some  ex^ 
tent,  in  the  minds  also  of  thinking  persons. 


128 


THE  INTERNATIONAL 


There  are  really  no  such  marked  lines  as  the  com- 
munistic writers  have  drawn  between  men  in 
modern  society.  The  holder  of  a few  acres  of 
land  in  his  own  right,  the  small  shopkeeper,  the 
various  artisans  on  a small  scale  in  towns  and  vil- 
lages have  some  resemblances  to  the  proletariat 
and  some  to  the  lourgeoisie.  Any  fundamental 
change  in  society  would  bring  no  more  prosperity 
to  them  in  a material  point  of  view,  or  help  them 
more  to  rise  in  the  social  scale.  These  classes, 
then,  have  no  motive  to  welcome  revolutions.  If 
there  was  to  be  a repartition  of  all  property  in 
equal  shares,  their  shares  would  be  little,  if  at  all, 
increased.  And  all  the  while,  in  all  the  countries 
of  Europe  and  America,  education,  both  general 
and  in  the  arts  of  industry,  is  becoming  larger 
and  more  open ; so  that  they  may  expect  that 
their  children  will  have  better  chances  in  life  than 
they  had  when  they  were  young.  Now,  these 
classes  or  departments  of  human  laborers  make 
up  the  majority  of  all  who  work  for  their  living. 
It  is,  then,  a minority  in  most  countries  that  com- 
poses the  discontented  and  embittered  mass ; it  is, 
in  the  main,  the  operatives  whom  improved  ma- 
chinery brings  together  in  large  establishments, 
who  are  able  to  influence  each  other  to  common 
action,  that  can  be  stirred  by  eloquent  socialists. 
It  is  these  between  whom  and  the  capitalists,  the 
employers,  the  transporters,  a running  flght  sub- 
sists, with  intervals  of  rest,  but  with  no  perma- 


workingmen’s  xVSSOCIATION. 


129 


nent  peace.  The  fight  does  no  good  in  the  end, 
for  strikes  can  never  establish  healthy  relations 
between  employer  and  employed.  The  methods 
of  getting  rid  of  employers  and  capitalists  only 
mitigate  the  evil  to  a slight  extent.  The  state,  as 
at  present  constituted,  cannot  do  anything  effec- 
tual to  promote  peace  between  the  parties,  except 
by  such  temporary  expedients  as  arbitration ; and 
so  the  workingmen  take  the  matter  into  their  own 
hands  and  form  associations  for  themselves. 

These  associations  and  the  prominence  given  to 
questions  of  political  economy  may  be  said  to  be 
the  characteristics  of  the  most  modern  commit- 
nistic^  or  we  will  say  socialistic  movements.  And 
another  peculiarity  of  the  more  modern  times  is 
the  spread  of  socialism  itself  through  European 
countries  and  even  in  both  Americas. 

The  history  of  this  spread  of  socialistic  opin- 
ions by  association  it  is  not  easy  to  give ; nor 
would  it  be  edifying,  unless  we  could  trace  some 
of  the  particulars  more  minutely  than  it  is  in  our 
power  to  do  with  our  materials  and  within  our 
limits.  As  it  is  a characteristic  of  the  age  to  be 
international ; as  clubs  and  associations  have  be- 
come far  more  common  since  the  Ecvolutionary 
period  began ; as  the  operatives  who  have  intelli- 
gence and  education  are  far  more  numerous  than 
formerly,  and  the  circulation  of  knowledge  by 
the  system  of  post-offices  is  greatly  facilitated  ; it 
is  not  strange  that  plans  and  views  prevailing  in 


130 


THE  INTERNATIONAL 


one  country  should  travel  into  another.  Nor  is 
it  strange  that  attempts  should  be  made  to  unite 
the  operatives  of  all  lands  in  one  great  associa- 
tion. 

In  1848,  when  Louis  Philippe  lost  his  throne, 
there  was  apprehension  from  the  communists  in 
Paris  ; and  one  motive  to  support  the  new  Empire 
was  the  need  of  a strong  conservative  government 
for  the  continuance  of  social  order.  The  same 
dread  was  inspired  by  the  other  revolutions  which 
in  quick  succession  followed  that  in  France.  The 
socialists  themselves  were  becoming  international. 
Thus  we  find  Karl  Marx  fioating  as  a pronounced 
socialist  in  the  decade  bemnnin^  with  1840  be- 
tween  France  and  Germany ; banished  from 
France  in  1844,  and  taking  refuge  in  Belgium ; 
banished  from  Belgium,  and  returning  to  his  na- 
tive land;  editing  a journal  in  Cologne  in  1848, 
which  was  suppressed  by  the  political  authorities 
in  1849  ; thence  fieeing  to  Paris,  and  ere  long  to 
London,  where  he  has  ever  since  resided.  The 
outbreaks  of  ’48  revealed  a danger  to  existing  in- 
stitutions which  in  part  proceeded  from  the  com- 
munistic leaven ; and,  accordingly,  the  police  of 
the  Continental  states  increased  in  its  preventive, 
as  well  as  in  its  detective  vigilance  against  the 
secret  foes  of  order.  A number  of  persons  im- 
bued with  socialistic  principles  found  England 
the  safest  country  to  live  in.  Expression  of  ob- 
noxious political  or  social  opinions  was  there  com- 


workingmen’s  association. 


131 


paratively  free;  there  chartism  had  been  sup- 
pressed and  secret  clubs  had  never  been  the  fash- 
ion; there  the  reform  bill  and  a change  in  the 
corn  laws,  with  other  wise  legislation  having  the 
welfare  of  all  classes  in  view,  quieted  • and  in  a 
measure  united  the  nation ; so  that  the  old  right 
of  free  speech  could  be  safely  granted  to  persons, 
few  of  whom  were  natives,  since  they  were  too 
insignificant  to  be  noticed,  although  holding  opin- 
ions, in  the  estimation  of  Englishmen,  the  most 
pernicious. 

Before  the  formation  of  the  ‘‘International 
Workingmen’s  Association,”  at  London,  in  1864, 
it  had  occurred  to  some  persons  to  found  such  a 
union  on  international  principles.  As  early  as 
1840  a society  existed  in  London  for  the  benefit 
of  German  operatives,  called  the  Arbeiterbild- 
tmgsverein^  which  counted  Englishmen,  French- 
men, Swedes,  Poles,  and  Hungarians  among  its 
members,  and  had  some  connection  with  work- 
ingmen’s societies  on  the  Continent.  It  is  said 
by  Jager,  in  his  “ Socialismus,”  that  a woman  of 
Geneva  conceived  the  idea,  in  1849,  of  uniting  all 
associations  of  operatives  into  one  great  wliole. 
And  a little  before  this  a manifesto  “ of  the  com- 
munist party,”  in  which  Marx  had  a leading  hand, 
called  on  the  proletariats  of  all  lands  to  unite. 
This  manifesto  demanded  the  abolition  of  private 
property  in  the  soil ; centralization  of  credit  in  a 
state  bank ; union  of  the  means  of  intercourse  in 


132 


THE  INTERNATIONAL 


the  hands  of  the  state ; national  workshops ; ferti- 
lizing and  tilling  the  soil  on  a common  prescribed 
plan  ; and  gratuitous  instruction.  A union  of 
communists  was  then  called  to  meet  at  Brussels ; 
but  the  February  Revolution  in  1848  brought  on  a 
i-eaction  and  discouraged  further  movements.  Sev- 
eral Germans  who  were  active  in  this  project  appear 
again  in  the  International — as  Marx,  Engels,  Lieb- 
knecht ; the  latter  of  whom  spoke  of  it  afterward 
as  designed  to  have  its  headquarters  at  London. 

There  may  have  been  a reason  for  an  associa- 
tion embracing  all  Europe,  which  we  have  not  yet 
noticed.  If  the  communists  could  not  be  organ- 
ized and  ready  for  action  everywhere  at  once,  it 
would  happen  that,  when  the  time  for  the  “ eman- 
cipation of  workingmen”  should  arrive,  one  na- 
tion would  bear  the  brunt  of  the  revolt,  and  the 
others  be  ready  to  afford  it  assistance.  Or,  if  the 
existing  form  of  society  could  be  overthrown  in 
one  land,  in  others  the  government  could  be  fore- 
vrarned  and  forearmed. 

The  immediate  impulse  to  the  formation  of  the 
International  was  given  in  1862,  when  the  Gov- 
ernment of  France  sent  over  to  London  a num- 
ber of  skilled  workmen  to  gather  up  what  infor- 
mation they  could  respecting  the  progress  of  the 
arts  from  the  exposition  of  that  year.  And  again, 
in  1863,  Odger,  a well-known  English  socialist, 
^Girged  the  holding  of  a general  workingmen’s 
coiigress,  in  order  to  prevent  foreign  workmen 


workingmen's  association. 


133 


from  coming  into  a land  where  wages  were  high, 
and  causing  a decline  in  them.  The  French  work- 
men, on  their  return  home,  gained  the  assent  of 
their  comrades  for  the  matter,  and  it  was  agreed 
that  there  should  be  a meeting  at  London  the 
next  year”  (Jager). 

A meeting  took  place,  accordingly,  on  the  28th 
of  September,  at  which  tlie  veteran  conspirator, 
Mazzini,  made  an  address,  although  having  little 
in  common  with  the  object  for  which  the  meet- 
ing was  convened.  His  goal  was  a political  one. 
He  was  for  a strong  central  power,  which  should 
begin  a movement;  while  the  essence  of  the  In- 
ternational movement  was  a federal  association,  a 
combination  of  movements  in  part  already  begun, 
with  the  social  end  in  view  of  raising  the  opera- 
tives up  over  against  the  employers  and  capital- 
ists. To  them  political  power  was  a means ; and 
to  Mazzini,  who  seems  to  have  had  no  thought  of 
overthrowing  society,  it  was  an  end.  Marx  also 
made  an  address  and  proposed  a series  of  statutes. 
In  his  address  there  was  little  of  agitation,  and 
the  plan  of  the  association  was  not  unfolded  at 
large ; but  he  pointed  toward  a system  in  which 
wages  should  disappear,  and  the  working-class 
should  hold  in  their  hands  the  means  of  produc- 
tion furnished  by  nature.  These  things  must  be- 
come the  property  of  the  state,  which  could  be 
effected  only  when  the  power  of  the  state  passed 
over  into  socialistic  hands. 


134 


THE  INTERNATIONAL 


A few  words  are  needed  to  explain  the  organi- 
zation and  working  power  of  the  International, 
which  is  in  the  main  simple  and  efficient. 

The  general  statutes  state  that  the  association 
is  founded  to  serve  as  a centre  of  union  and  of 
systematical  co-operation  between  the  working- 
men’s societies  in  various  lands,  which  have  the 
common  aim  of  the  protection,  advancement,  and 
entire  emancipation  of  the  working-class.  A 
general  congress  assembles  yearly,  which  consists 
of  deputies  from  the  several  branches,  and  deter- 
mines the  time  and  place  of  the  next  congress ; 
for  the  assembling  of  which,  after  such  determi- 
nation, no  special  invitation  is  required.  The 
congress  from  year  to  year  fixes  the  seat  of  the 
general  council  and  names  its  members.  The 
council  may  add  new  members  to  its  body  ; must 
present  a yearly  report  of  its  proceedings;  and 
can,  in  pressing  cases,  call  a new  congress  before 
its  regular  time  for  sitting.  The  council  consists 
of  workingmen  of  the  countries  represented  in  the 
associations,  and  fills  the  places  necessary  for 
carrying  on  business  out  of  the  members  of  its 
own  body.  It  serves  as  the  medium  of  communi- 
cation between  the  various  national  and  local 
groups  of  the  association ; so  that  the  workmen 
of  a land  may  remain  constantly  informed  of  the 
movements  of  their  class  in  all  other  lands ; that 
an  investigation  into  the  social  condition  of  the 
various  lands  of  Europe  may  take  place  at  the 


workingmen’s  association. 


135 


same  time  and  under  common  guidance;  that 
questions  of  general  interest,  started  by  one 
society,  may  be  taken  up  by  all  others ; and  that, 
should  immediate  practical  steps  be  necessary — 
as,  for  instance,  in  international  disputes — the 
united  associations  may  take  action  at  the  same 
time  and  in  a uniform  way.” 

Among  the  rules  for  the  proceedings  of  the  In- 
ternational, which  were  enacted  at  various  times 
from  1866  onward,  we  mention  the  following: 
Every  association,  section,  or  group  sends  one 
membeif  to  the  congress,  whose  expenses  his  con- 
stituency is  expected  to  defray.  Where  the  num- 
ber of  members  exceeds  five  hundred,  for  every 
additional  five  hundred  a new  member  may  be 
sent.  In  countries  where  the  law  prohibits  branch 
associations  of  the  International,  deputies  may  be 
admitted  to  the  congresses  for  the  purposes  of 
debate  on  questions  of  principle  only.  A contri- 
bution of  one  penny,  or  ten  centimes,  is  required 
from  all  sections  and  associations  connected  with 
the  International.  The  plan,  if  fully  matured, 
of  the  associations  would  be  in  the  ascending 
order,  groups  and  sections  in  a city  or  tovm ; 
federations  or  unions  in  a place  or  territory  where 
the  different  sections  can  unite  together ; and  the 
General  International  Workingmen’s  Association 
crowning  all.  As  this  has  a general  council  of 
fifty  members,  with  London  for  its  seat ; so  each 
federation  is  expected  to  have  a central  com- 


136 


THE  INTERNATIONAL 


mittee  or  council,  and  each  section  has  its  own 
particular  statutes.  Each  federation  has  power  to 
admit  or  suspend  local  sections,  and  must  make 
report  of  its  doings  every  three  months.  The 
federations  are  expected  to  hold  congresses  stated- 
ly, and  the  smaller  unions  to  have  their  own  par- 
ticular meetings. 

The  next  subject  which  will  call  for  our  atten- 
tion will  be  the  spread  of  the  International ; 
after  which  we  shall  consider  its  action  and  his- 
tory, especially  as  revealed  by  its  general  con- 
gresses, until  1872,  when  it  fell  under  the  ban 
of  Europe. 


II. 

THE  INTERNATIONAL  CONTINUED. 

The  details  in  regard  to  the  spread  of  this 
workingmen’s  association,  as  it  respects  the  num- 
ber of  its  members  and  its  ramifications,  would 
be  unprofitable  and  could  not  be  relied  upon  with 
entire  confidence.  Thus  we  find  that  the  num- 
ber of  English  members  was  stated  by  Dupont, 
the  secretary  of  the  general  council,  to  be  25,173 
in  1866;  and  by  Applegarth,  one  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  same  council,  to  be  95,000 ; while 
10,000  is  accepted  as  a more  correct  estimate  by 
Jager,  the  historian  of  socialism.  In  some  coun- 
tries, again,  the  restrictions  imposed  by  govern- 


wokkingmen’s  association. 


isr 


ments  must  have  prevented  many  from  joining 
the  association.  In  Germany,  where  it  had  any 
foothold,  its  progress  was  impeded  until  1869  by 
the  Workingmen’s  Union,  an  earlier  society, 
founded  by  Lassalle;  and  the  laws  prevented 
branches  of  foreign  associations  from  existing  in 
Prussia.  But  in  France,  until  1871,  it  was  strong 
and  revolutionary.  In  Switzerland,  where  it  was 
free  to  spread,  it  embraced,  one  would  think,  all 
the  operatives.  In  Belgium  also  it  had  an  exten- 
sive membership,  while  in  Holland  few  cared  any- 
thing about  it.  In  Austria  there  seem  to  have 
been  no  capable  leaders  who  could  unite  a party 
together,  and  the  German  Workingmen’s  Union 
had  already  preoccupied  this  field.  When,  in 
1869,  the  Social  Democratic  Workingmen’s  Party 
was  founded,  at  Eisenach,  nearly  100,000  Aus- 
trian operatives  were  represented  by  delegates, 
of  which  number  59,000  belonged  to  Vienna  and 
25,000  to  Bohemia.  In  Spain  it  had  many  ad- 
herents— according  to  some,  100,000 ; according 
to  others,  40,000.  It  crossed  over  the  Atlantic, 
and  established  itself  by  the  side  of  associations 
already  existing  in  the  United  States,  which  had 
private  relations  toward  capitalists,  rather  than 
the  revolution  of  society,  in  view. 

In  speaking  of  what  the  International  and  its 
subordinate  branches  have  done  to  declare  and 
define  their  objects,  we  must  give  our  testimony 
to  the  ability  and  the  general  moderation  with 


138 


THE  INTERNATIONAL 


which  the  reports  submitted  to  congresses,  and 
other  declarations  of  principles,  have  been  pre- 
pared. The  association  contams  an  amount  of 
talent  which  no  one  has  a right  to  despise.  Part 
of  this  talent,  as  it  seems,  pertains  to  ^^head- 
worhers^'^  or  the  “ inielleoixidl proletariat,'^^  At  one 
of  the  congresses  it  was  made  a question  whether 
any  but  \i2indL-wor7cers  ” should  be  members  of 
the  International.  The  French  members,  who 
had  had  unpleasant  experiences  with  the  men  of 
the  tongue  and  pen,  opposed  their  entrance. 
They  urged  the  danger  which  there  would  be  in 
letting  advocates  and  journalists  have  an  influence 
over  the  meetings  of  men  of  work.  But  the  plan 
was  carried  by  the  English  and  German  mem- 
bers. 

The  first  general  congress  met  at  Geneva,  Sept. 
3d-8th,  1866.  It  had  been  voted  to  hold  a con- 
gress at  Brussels,  in  1865  ; but  hindrances  put  in 
the  way  of  the  French  socialists,  and  the  unwih 
lingness  of  the  Belgian  government  to  allow  a 
meeting  within  its  borders,  caused  it  to  be  post- 
poned until  the  next  year.  The  congress  of  the 
next  year,  or  1866,  sat  at  Geneva ; but  did  little 
that  looked  toward  the  goal  of  the  association. 
They  favored  counting  eight  hours’  labor  as  a 
day’s  work ; they  denounced  the  labor  of  women 
in  manufactories,  ^^as  a cause  of  the  degenera- 
tion and  demoralization  of  the  human  race;” 
they  rebuked  trades’  unions  for  occupying  them- 


workingmen’s  association. 


139 


selves  with  immediate  contests,  instead  of  acting 
against  the  system  of  capital  itself  : they  favored 
co-operative  labor,  but  thought  that  it  ought  to 
be  generalized  and  not  have  a special  form  given 
to  it ; they  proposed  a confederation  of  all  the 
workingmen’s  banks,  with  the  view  of  ultimately 
uniting  them  in  a central  establishment,  under 
the  association ; they  unanimously  condemned 
permanent  or  standing  armies,  and  approved  of 
the  general  armament  of  the  people  and  their  in- 
struction in  the  handling  of  arms.” 

The  next  congress  met  at  Lausanne,  in  Septem- 
ber, 1867,  under  the  presidency  of  Eugene  Du- 
pont, secretary  of  the  general  council.  Seventy- 
one  delegates  were  present.  Among  the  points 
here  discussed  was  that  contained  in  the  question 
whether  “ the  emancipation  of  the  fourth  estate 
(or  working-class)  might  not  result  in  the  forma- 
tion of  2^  fifths  the  situation  of  which  might  be 
more  miserable  still.”  The  prevailing  opinion 
was  that  the  actual  efforts  of  the  workingmen’s 
associations,  if  they  preserved  their  existing  form, 
might  have  this  effect ; but  that  this  danger 
would  disappear  in  proportion  as  the  develop- 
ment of  modern  industry  should  render  produc- 
tion on  a small  scale  impossible.  Modern  pro- 
duction on  a great  scale  fuses  together  individual 
efforts  and  renders  co-operative  industry  a neces- 
sity for  all.”  To  obviate  this  danger,  the  prol- 
etariat ” must  become  convinced  that  social  trans- 


140 


THE  INTERNATIONAL 


formation  can  operate  only  by  means  acting  on 
the  whole  of  society,  etc. 

On  the  subject  of  education,  embraced  in 
another  question  for  discussion,  the  congress  de- 
clares “ that  it  concedes  to  the  stkte  no  other  right 
than  that  of  taking  the  place  of  a father  of  a 
family  when  he  is  unable  to  fulfil  his  duty.  At 
all  events,  all  religious  instruction  ought  to  be  re- 
moved from  the  programme.” 

In  the  report  on  the  definition  of  the  part 
which  the  state  has  to  act  we  find  the  following 
views  expressed  : The  efforts  of  nations  ought  to 
tend  to  make  the  state  the  holder  of  the  means 
of  transport  and  of  circulation,  in  order  to  anni- 
hilate the  powerful  monopoly  of  the  great  com- 
panies, which,  by  submitting  the  working-class  to 
their  arbitrary  rules,  attack  at  once  both  the  dig- 
nity of  man  and  the  liberty  of  the  individual.” 

At  the  same  congress  a report  was  read  which 
is  interesting,  as  showing  the  state  of  war  be- 
tween the  International  and  the  capitalists.  The 
master  basket-makers  of  London  gave  notice  to 
their  men  that  they  must  dissolve  their  associa- 
tion within  three  days  and  agree  to  take  lower 
^ wages,  or  be  locked  out  of  tlie  shops.  The  work- 
men declined  to  accept  of  the  terms,  and  the  em- 
ployers, aware  of  what  their  decision  would  be, 
had  sent  for  Belgian  workmen  to  take  their  place. 
They  had  arrived,  and  were  kept  from  all  contact 
from  all  other  workmen,  as  far  as  possible.  “ But 


WOiiKIXGMEN’s  ASSOCIATIOX.  141 

the  council-general  of  the  International  made  out 
to  get  within  the  ^ cordon  scmitaire^  and  hy  a 
stratagem  made  themselves  known  to  the  Belgian 
workmen.  On  the  morrow  the  workmen,  having 
comprehended  what  was  their  duty,  returned  to 
Belgium,  having  been  indemnified  for  their  lost 
time  by  the  basket-makers’  society  at  London.” 
Another  detachment  of  laborers  from  the  same 
country  was  in  the  same  way  persuaded  to  go 
home. 

The  leaders  of  the  International  cared  nothing 
for  strikes,  in  themselves  considered ; but  re- 
garded them  as  desirable  means  of  bringing 
about  the  good  time  when  private  capital  should 
cease  to  be.  The  strikes  would  unite  the  opera- 
tives by  close  ties,  as  common  sufferers  and  as  hav- 
ing common  enemies.  They  would  turn  the  eyes 
of  the  operatives  toward  the  International,  thus 
increasing  its  strength  and  importance.  They 
would  make  capital  more  odious  and  open  labor- 
ers’ eyes  to  the  advantages  of  universal  combina- 
tion. When  the  end  should  be  gained  and  the 
state  should  become  the  only  capitalist,  strikes 
would  become  impossible.  The  workmen  who 
should  strike  then  might  as  well  hang  themselves 
outright. 

At  the  congresses  of  Brussels  and  Bale,  in  1868 
arid  1869,  a discussion  sprang  up  on  property, 
which  showed  some  difference  of  opinion.  De 
Paepe,  of  Brussels,  in  a report,  had  spoken  of 


142 


THE  INTERNATIONAL 


“certain  measures  of  general  reform”  proposed 
by  divers  socialists.  These  were  the  transforma- 
tion of  national  banks  into  banks  of  gratuitous 
credit ; the  making  of  the  soil  a part  of  the  col- 
lective property  of  society ; the  abolition  of  in- 
heritance ah  intestate  outside  of  certain  degrees 
of  relationship ; and  the  laying  of  a tax  on  succes- 
sion in  the  direct  line.  Citizen  Tolain,  speaking 
on  the  subject  of  making  the  soil  collective  prop- 
erty, admitted  that  certain  kinds  of  property 
ought  to  become  collective ; other  kinds,  by  their 
nature,  ought  to  remain  individual.  To  this  De 
Paepe  replied  that  Tolain  wanted  canals,  roads? 
mines  to  become  the  collective  property  of  society ; 
but  he  himself  would  extend  that  idea  so  far  as 
to  include  all  landed  property  [property  in  the 
soil  or  resting  on  it].  Coullery,  of  La  Chaux  de 
Ponds,  avowed  himself  a partisan  of  individual 
property.  The  soil,  he  said,  was  an  instrument 
of  labor.  It  ought  to  belong  to  the  laborer  by 
the  same  title  with  every  other  utensil.  If  you 
make  the  soil  collective  property,  why  not  extend 
your  theory  to  all  instruments  of  labor?  This 
would  be  logical,  but  would  be  absurd. 

We  refer  to  this  difference  of  opinion  as  show- 
ing that  the  extreme  theorists  had  not  yet  got 
complete  ascendency.  And  yet  they  alone  com- 
prehended where  the  theory  must  carry  them. 
If  persons  like  Coullery  had  had  their  way,  the 
whole  scheme  would  have  been  an  abortion. 


workingmen’s  association. 


143 


The  congress  of  Brussels  met  in  September, 
1868,  and  was  largely  attended;  but  its  doings 
show  a repetition  of  the  opinions  expressed  at  the 
previous  congresses.  On  the  question  of  strikes 
the  congress  decided  that,  in  the  actual  struggle 
between  labor  and  capital,  they  were  legitimate 
and  necessary;  and  recommended  that,  in  each 
federation,  there  should  be  a council  of  arbitra- 
tion, to  decide  on  their  seasonableness  and  justify- 
ing causes  in  future.  On  a question  touching 
machines,  among  other  things  the  council  de- 
clared that  machines,  like  all  other  instruments 
of  labor,  should  belong  to  the  laborers ; but  that 
this  end  could  be  reached  only  by  co-operative 
associations  and  a system  of  mutual  credit,  and 
that  at  present  there  is  room  for  intervening  in 
the  introduction  of  machines  into  the  workshops, 
so  far  that  they  should  not  be  introduced  without 
certain  guarantees  and  compensations  to  the  la- 
borer. On  a question  relating  to  property,  the 
congress  decided  that  the  ways  of  communica- 
tion and  forests  ought  to  be  held  as  common 
property,  and  passed  the  same  resolution  respect- 
ing the  soil,  mines,  quarries,  coal-pits,  and  rail- 
roads. 

Dupont,  general  secretary  of  the  International 
and  one  of  the  vice-presidents  at  this  congress, 
in  a speech  at  the  close  of  the  proceedings,  said : 

What  we  wish  to  overthrow  is,  not  the  tyrant, 
but  tyranny.  We  want  no  governments  any 


144 


THE  INTERNATIONAL 


longer,  for  governments  oppress  us  by  taxes ; we 
want  no  armies  any  longer,  for  armies  butcher 
and  murder  us ; we  want  no  religion  any  longer, 
for  religions  stifle  the  understanding.” 

The  congress  of  Basel  met  in  September,  1869, 
and  numbered  eighty  members.  A committee, 
appointed  to  consider  the  question  of  property, 
brought  the  subject  before  the  congress  under 
two  heads.  They  proposed  that  it  should  declare, 
first,  that  society  has  the  right  of  abolishing  indi- 
vidual property  in  the  soil  and  of  causing  it  to 
belong  to  the  community ; secondly,  that  it  is 
necessary  that  the  soil  should  become  collective 
property.  After  debate,  in  which  some  con- 
tended that  individual  property  was  the  source  of 
all  social  miseries  and  inequalities,  and  that,  as 
having  its  origin  in  violence  and  usurpation,  it 
ought  to  disappear,  and  give  way  to  landed  prop- 
erty, regulated  by  communes  organized  as  federa- 
tions,” only  four  stood  up  for  individual  property. 
The  first  proposition  was  carried  by  54  to  4,  and 
the  second  by  53  to  4. 

The  subject  of  inheritance,  which  had  not  been 
discussed  at  any  previous  congress,  was  also 
brought  forward  at  Basel,  in  a proposition  to 
adopt  the  following  resolution : 

“Considering  that  the  right  of  inheritance,  which  is  an 
element  inseparable  from  individual  property,  tends  to  alien- 
ate property  in  the  soil  and  social  riches,  to  the  benefit  of 
some  and  to  the  detriment  of  the  greater  number  ; that,  by 


woekingmen’s  association. 


145 


consequence,  the  rig-ht  of  inheritance  is  an  obstacle,  pre- 
Tenting  the  soil  and  social  riches  from  becoming  a part  of 
the  collective  property ; 

‘‘  That,  on  the  other  hand,  the  right  of  inheritance,  how- 
ever restricted  in  its  operation,  constitutes  a privilege,  the 
greater  or  less  importance  of  which  does  not  destroy  its  in- 
iquity in  point  of  right,  and  which  is  a standing  menace  to 
social  right ; 

“ That,  further,  it  is  an  essential  element  of  all  kinds  of 
inequality,  because  it  prevents  individuals  from  having  the 
same  means  of  development,  both  moral  and  material ; 

‘ ‘ Considering,  finally,  that  the  congress  has  pronounced 
in  favor  of  the  collectivity  of  landed  property,  and  that  this 
declaration  would  be  illogical  if  it  was  not  corroborated  by 
that  which  now  follows ; 

“ The  congress  recognizes  the  principle  that  the  right  of 
inheritance  ought  to  be  completely  and  radically  abolished, 
and  that  this  abolition  is  one  of  the  most  indispensable  con- 
ditions of  the  emancipation  of  labor.” 

This  report  did  not  meet  with  entire  accept- 
ance. One  member  proposed  transitory  meas- 
ures, to  make  the  passage  smoother  from  the  pres- 
ent state  of  things.  Another,  in  the  name  of  his 
section,  proposed  a limitation  in  respect  of  de^ 
grees  of  kindred.  If  reduced  to  its  minimum, 
he  thought  that  individual  inheritance  was  only 
an  element  of  progress  and  morality.  He  did 
not  believe  in  its  efficacy  as  a means  of  social 
liquidation.” 

When  the  vote  was  taken  on  this  proposition, 
32  delegates  were  in  favor  of  it,  23  against  it, 
while  17  abstained  from  voting. 

At  the  same  congress  a report  was  presented 


146  THE  INTERNATIONAL 

by  the  delegates  of  the  section  of  Brussels,  of 
which,  for  want  of  room,  we  can  only  cite  the 
closing  words : One  of  two  things  must  be  true. 
Either  the  socialists  who  demand  the  abolition  of 
inheritance  confine  themselves  to  this  single  re- 
form— and  in  that  case  we  claim  that  they  none 
the  less  retain  the  distinction  of  capitalists  and 
laborers,  consequently  ‘parasitism'^  for  the  one 
and  pauperism  for  the  others — or  they  demand 
besides  that  the  soil  become  collective  property ; 
that  the  capitalists’  deductions  from  the  laborers’ 
wages  be  done  away  with;  that  instruments  of 
labor  be  put  in  the  hands  of  the  laborers  as  their 
possession ; that  integral  instruction  be  given  to 
all ; and,  in  that  case,  we  claim  that  the  abolition 
of  inheritance  is,  to  say  the  least,  useless  and 
superfiuous.” 

We  shall  finish  what  we  have  to  say  of  the  In- 
ternational in  the  next  article. 


III. 

THE  INTERNATIONAL  CONCLUDED. 

It  was  determined  at  Basel  that  the  next  con- 
gress of  the  International  should  be  held  in  Sep- 
tember, 1870,  at  Baris.  But  on  the  15th  of  July 
of  that  year  war  was  declared  by  France  against 
Prussia,  and  no  congress  was  held,  either  at  Paris 
or  elsewhere,  although  an  effort  was  made  to 


workingmen’s  association. 


147 


have  one  convened  at  Mainz.  The  next  year,  in 
consequence,  no  doubt,  of  the  bad  odor  in  which 
the  International  then  was,  a congress  was  not 
summoned ; but  a private  conference  met  at  Lon- 
don, the  proceedings  of  which  were  of  small  im- 
portance. The  congress  for  1872  was  appointed 
to  meet  at  the  Hague,  in  Holland ; the  reason  for 
meeting  there  being  that  ‘‘  the  existing  persecu- 
tions of  the  International  by  the  governments 
both  in  France  and  in  Germany  do  not  allow  the 
calling  of  the  congress  either  to  Paris  or  to 
Mainz.” 

In  the  course  of  this  year  a new  section  of  the 
International  was  formed  at  Geneva,  by  a very 
remarkable  man,  Michael  Bakunin  by  name,  a 
Russian  Nihilist  and  a fugitive  from  his  country, 
who  was  arrested  and  condemned  to  death  in  the 
Saxon  and  Austrian  courts  and  then  delivered 
over  to  Russian  authorities.  Sent  to  Siberia,  he 
escaped,  and  reappeared  in  Western  Europe, 
where  he  figures  as  the  most  extreme  of  radicals. 
In  a speech,  made  at  the  third  session  of  the 
Congress  of  Berne,  he  declared,  that  religion  was 
not  simply  a disorder  of  the  brain  ; but  was  also 
a passionate  and  perpetual  protestation  of  the 
entire  nature  of  man  and  of  the  infinite  riches 
of  the  human  heart  against  the  narrowness  and  the 
misery  of  reality.  Religion  will  be  almighty  as 
long  as  unreason  and  unrighteousness  reign  on 
earth.  If  we  give  the  earth  back  what  belongs 


14S 


THE  INTERNATIONAL 


to  her,  that  is  happiness  and  fraternity  religion 
will  have  no  longer  a reason  for  its  existence. 

Bakunin  did  not  like  communism,  because  it 
concentrated  all  the  powers  of  society  in  and 
transferred  them  to  the  state ; because  it  neces- 
sarily leads  to  the  centralization  of  property  in 
the  state,  while  he  desired  the  abolition  of  the 
state  altogether.” 

At  the  formation  above  referred  to  of  the  Al- 
liance of  the  Socialist  Democracy,  the  following 
programme  was  adopted  by  Bakunin  and  his 
friends:  ‘^The  alliance  declares  itself  atheistic. 
It  desires  the  abolition  of  worship ; the  substitu- 
tion of  science  for  faith  and  of  human  justice 
for  divine  justice ; the  abolition  of  marriage,  so 
far  as  it  is  a political,  religious,  judicial,  and  civil 
institution.”  To  this  it  adds  some  of  the  com- 
monplaces of  the  social  system — as  the  abolition 
of  inheritance  and  the  conversion  of  every  kind 
of  property  into  collective  property,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  being  utilized  by  rural  and  indus- 
trial associations.  It  recognizes  the  fact  that  all 
existing  states  and  bodies  invested  with  authority 
must  disappear  in  the  universal  union  of  free  as- 
sociations; and  declares  that  the  social  question 
cannot  find  its  definitive  and  real  solution  except 
on  the  basis  of  the  universal  and  international 
solidarity  of  all  countries;  and,  therefore,  dis- 
cards all  politics  founded  on  so-called  patriotism 
and  on  the  rivalry  of  nations.” 


workingmen's  association. 


149 


This  atheistic  section — which  also  seems  to 
have  been  a secret  society — had  applied  for  ad- 
mission in  the  preceding  April  into  the  ^‘Ro- 
mand,”  or  Swiss  federation,  and  was  received  by 
a majority  of  three,  21  voting  for  and  18  against 
its  admission.  Thereupon  the  non-contents  with- 
drew from  the  congress,  and  the  schism  was  last- 
ing. In  the  general  congress  at  the  Hague  the 
question  of  declaring  the  Alliance,”  founded  by 
Bakunin,  international,  was  put  into  the  hands  of 
a committee,  which  proposed  the  exclusion  of  the 
Alliance,  and  especially  that  of  Bakunin  and 
another  member,  from  the  General  Association, 
on  the  ground  of  their  having  formed  a secret 
society.  This  report  was  accepted  ; but  the  per- 
sons concerned  declared  that  they  would  not  obey 
the  vote.  At  a congress  of  the  Swiss  federation, 
held  the  same  year,  at  St.  Imier,  in  Bern,  it  was 
unanimously  resolved  by  the  sections  represented 
to  reject  the  resolutions  passed  at  the  Hague. 
There  could  be  no  other  course  after  this  than 
for  the  general  council  at  London  to  suspend  the 
sections,  and  for  the  next  congress  to  confirm  its 
action. 

The  International,  just  after  the  close  of  its 
session  at  the  Hague,  lost  some  other  members 
by  their  voluntary  abandonment  of  a connection 
with  the  Association.  These  were  members  of 
the  Commune  at  Paris  who  carried  things  to  an 
extreme,  belonging  to  the  clique  of  which  Blan- 


150 


THE  INTERNATIONAL 


qiii  was  the  head,  and  who  were  also  members  of 
tlie  International.  One  of  these  had  presided  at 
the  congress ; several  were  members  of  the  gen- 
eral council  at  London.  They  complain  that  the 
International  Association  had  not  done  its  work ; 
had  not  enough  stimulated  the  political  activity 
of  the  proletariat.  It  ought  to  be  not  a league 
of  co-operative  unions,  nor  a society  for  support- 
ing strikes.  It  should  be,  rather,  the  interna- 
tional vanguard  of  the  revolutionary  proletariat. 
In  withdrawing  from  the  International,  however, 
they  give  the  assurance  that  they  will  not  with- 
draw from  action.  “We  have  but  one  object: 
the  reorganization  of  the  workingmen’s  party  in 
the  shape  best  fitted  for  striking  a blow,  in  France 
as  well  as  in  any  other  land,  and  under  the  ban- 
ner of  social  revolution.  In  France  it  is  abso- 
lutely necessary  to  keep  the  plans  of  the  social- 
istic revolutionary  party  strictly  separate  from 
those  of  the  International.  There  the  future  of 
the  revolution  lies  in  the  hands  of  the  proletariat 
of  the  towns,  which  singly  and  alone  has  a revo- 
lutionary spirit.  Above  all  things  must  every 
contact  with  the  hourgeoisie  be  avoided ; at  no 
cost  should  a compromise  be  made  with  parties 
in  that  interest.” 

From  these  words  it  is  plain  that  the  Interna- 
tional was  now  brought  into  extreme  perplexity, 
into  difiiculties  which  were  unavoidable  and  re- 
sulted from  its  very  constitution.  On  the  one 


workingmen’s  association. 


151 


hand,  it  had  a transitional  policy,  to  encourage 
the  union  and  common  feeling  of  the  laboring 
class  by  encouraging  strikes  and  trades-unions 
and  every  method  of  joint  action,  save  war. 
AVar  it  did  not  seek,  at  least  as  an  immediate  ob- 
ject, and  the  protests  were  loud  against  the 
Tranco-German  war,  when  it  was  in  prospect. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  avowedly  kept  one  object 
in  view,  the  overturning  of  society  in  its  present 
shape,  and  a reconstruction  in  which  all  classes 
but  one  should  disappear.  Every  man  who  had 
property,  however  invested,  within  the  country, 
looked  forward  to  the  triumph  of  socialism  as  the 
ruin  of  himself  and  his  family.  Every  state  and 
all  interested  in  upholding  the  state  or  in  maintain- 
ing individual  rights,  as  they  are  understood  in 
civilized  communities,  interpreted  a socialistic 
state  as  an  overturn  begun  by  civil  war,  and  sure 
to  involve  the  destruction  of  every  existing  thing 
except  a state  and  operatives  paid  by  that  state. 
Was  it  strange,  now,  that  many  on  both  sides 
honestly  believed  that  the  new  millennium  could 
not  come  in  without  force ; although  the  Interna- 
tional held  out  hopes  that  suffrage,  opposing  the 
interests  of  capital  and  a conviction  of  the  un- 
avoidableness of  a change,  would  make  the  upper 
classes,  when  the  time  should  come,  willing  to  yield 
without  fighting  ? 

This,  also,  we  think,  was  a necessary  result  of 
the  agitations  attendant  on  the  existence  of  such 


152 


THE  INTEENATIONAL 


organizations  as  the  International,  that  the  pas- 
sions of  the  ignorant  and  unreflecting  were  of 
necessity  excited  beyond  the  limits  of  reason. 
Socialism  could  not  live  and  thrive  without  agita- 
tion. To  foster  and  increase  the  agitation,  the 
line  between  the  operative  and  the  employer 
must  be  widened  and  rendered  more  precise  ; the 
feeling  of  wrong  must  be  intensified.  The  capi- 
talist must  be  looked  on  as  a thief.  I venture  to 
say  that  no  equal  intolerance,  between  parties  in 
politics  or  in  religion  on  the  large  scale,  can  be 
shown  in  any  crisis  of  change  or  strife.  The 
leaders  in  the  socialistic  movement — able  men, 
who  ought  to  have  their  own  tempers  at  com- 
mand— show  a malignant  spirit  that  a man  con- 
scious of  a good  cause  should  be  ashamed  of. 
Thus,  in  the  communistic  manifest  prepared  in 
1847  by  Marx  and  Engels,  two  very  able  men 
whose  equals  would  take  a foremost  place  in  any 
party,  do  not  scruple  to  write  as  follows:  ^^For 
the  rest,  nothing  is  more  laughable  than  the 
highly  moral  horror  of  our  hoiirgeois  at  the  pre- 
tendedly  official  [accounts  of]  the  community  of 
wives  among  the  communists.  The  communists 
need  not  introduce  community  of  wives,  for  it 
has  almost  always  existed.  Our  hourgeois^  not 
content  with  having  the  wives  and  daughters  of 
i\\Q  jgroletojriat  at  their  disposal,  find  a chief  pleas- 
ure in  seducing  each  other’s  wives.  Civil  mar- 
riage is  in  reality  the  community  of  wives.”  As  for 


WORTONGMEN  S ASSOCIATION. 


153 


these  words  we  only  ask,  how  a man  could  be  be- 
lieved in  any  statement  afterward,  who  would 
send  forth  stuff  into  the  world.  But,  to  turn  to 
another  form  of  this  malignity,  we  cite  a passage 
from  a letter  of  Dupont,  a secretary  of  the  gen- 
eral council  of  the  International  at  London,  writ- 
ten a day  or  two  after  the  disaster  at  Sedan ; 

Nothing  is  changed.  The  power  is  still  in  the 
hands  of  the  hourgeois.  In  these  circumstances, 
the  role  of  the  workmen — or,  rather,  their  duty — 
is  to  let  this  ‘vermine  hourgeoisie^  make  peace 
with  the  Prussians,  for  the  shame  of  the  act  will 
never  be  wiped  off  from  them,”  etc.  The  lyouv- 
geoisie^  who  are  charmed  with  their  triumph,  will 
not  at  once  perceive  the  progress  of  our  Associa- 
tion, and  for  the  day  of  real  war  the  operatives 
will  be  ready.”  And,  to  give  one  sample  more, 
one  Sylvis,  then  president  of  the  National 
Labor  Union  of  the  United  States,”  writes  from 
Philadelphia,  in  May,  1869,  as  follows : “ Our 

last  war  has  had  for  its  result  to  build  up  the 
most  infamous  financial  aristocracy  in  the  whole 
world.  This  money  power  pumps  the  substance 
of  the  people.  We  have  declared  war  against  it, 
and  think  that  we  shall  gain  the  victory.  We 
shall  first  try  suffrage ; but,  if  it  fails,  we  shall 
have  recourse  to  more  efficacious  measures.  A 
little  blood-letting  is  sometimes  necessary  in  des- 
perate cases.”  The  man  perhaps  was  a very  mild 
person ; but  the  style  of  the  class  required  him  to 


154 


THIS  INTERNATIONAL 


say  something  sanguinary.  He  died  soon  after 
writing  the  letter. 

The  International  suffered  to  such  a degree 
from  its  alleged  complicity  in  the  horrors  of  the 
spring  of  1871  that  it  has  not  since  recovered. 
The  question  may  be  asked,  to  what  degree  was  it 
answerable  for  those  crimes  ? As  far  as  we  can 
discover,  it  had  little  direct  blame  for  them,  how- 
ever much  the  general  council  at  London  might 
try  to  whitewash  the  villanies  of  the  insurgents, 
and  to  blacken  the  deeds  of  the  government’s 
army : and  the  members  of  it  at  Paris,  as  far  as 
we  can  discover,  were  not  among  those  who  ap- 
proved of  the  burning  of  the  public  buildings  in 
Paris,  or  of  the  murder  of  the  hostages,  that 
most  fiendish  of  crimes.  The  question  is  not  an 
easy  one  to  resolve,  nor  have  we  many  materials 
for  a satisfactory  solution ; but,  as  far  as  we  can 
discover,  the  case  stands  thus : 

1.  The  authorities  of  the  International  appear 
to  have  taken,  before  the  war,  no  active  part  in 
bringing  it  on.  What  individuals  may  have 
wished  or  done,  they  were  not  responsible  for 
these  horrors.  At  the  congress  of  the  Hague  the 
delegates  from  Spain,  Belgium,  and  the  Federa- 
tion of  the  Jura  proposed  to  do  away  with  the 
general  council.  They  asserted  that  its  present 
power  was  too  great,  and  that  a bureau  of  statisti- 
cal correspondence  would  be  enough  for  the  wants 
of  the  Association.  They  added  that  the  gen- 


workingmen’s  association. 


155 


oral  council  would  never  lead  men  to  the  barri- 
cades. They  had  thus  far  neither  instigated  an 
insurrection  nor  organized  one ; but,  on  the  con- 
trary, taken  hold  of  things  in  a repressive  way. 
The  majority  in  the  congress  replied  that  the 
general  council  did  not  exist  for  the  purpose  of 
initiating  a revolution.  They  appeared  on  the 
scene  only  to  give  help,  as  in  the  strike  of  the 
bronze-workers  at  Paris,  that  in  Newcastle,  etc. 
If  it  had  not  done  enough,  the  cause  lay  in  its 
limited  power  ” (from  Jager). 

2.  The  Commune  of  Paris  was  elected  by  the 
revolutionary  body  in  possession  of  the  city,  on 
the  26th  of  March,  1871,  after  the  preliminary 
peace  of  Feb.  26th,  made  by  the  legislative  body 
at  Versailles  with  the  Prussians.  The  Commune 
consisted  normally  of  eighty  representatives  of 
the  quarters  of  the  arrondissements  ” of  the 
city.  To  this  body  belonged  a large  number  of 
socialists,  but  a minority  of  the  members  of  the 
International.  These  last,  however,  seem  to  have 
been  the  most  moderate,  the  most  able,  of  the 
representatives  in  the  Commune.  A French 
authority  says  that  in  the  brief  history  of  the 
Commune  the  members  of  the  International 
played  the  most  serious  and  the  least  violent  role. 
They  furnished  the  Commune  with  men  of  ad- 
ministration and  theory — such  as  Theisz  at  the 
posts;  Frankel  in  the  department  of  industry; 
Yaillant  in  that  of  public  instruction  ; Beslay  in 


156 


THE  INTEKNATIONAL 


tlie  Bank;  Yesinier  in  the  Officiel  [jonrnal  of  the 
Commune],  who  gave  for  a moment  to  this  un- 
principled and  aimless  erneute  an  appearance  of 
regularity  and  life : they  voted  intrepidly  against 
violent  measures,  against  the  committee  of  pub- 
lic safety.  They  pursued  the  object  which  the 
socialists  had  in  view  throughout.  ^We  ought 
not  to  forget,’  said  Frankel,  in  the  session  of  May 
12th,  ‘ that  the  revolution  has  been  made  exclu- 
sively by  the  working-class.  If  we  do  nothing 
for  this  class,  I see  no  reason  for  the  existence  of 
the  Commune.’  And  it  was  not  until  this  social- 
ist minority  protested,  on  the  16th  of  May,  against 
the  revolutionary  dictatorship  of  Pyat,  Rigault, 
and  their  fellows,  and  declared  that  it  would  no 
longer  sit  in  the  Hotel  de  Yille,  that  Rigault 
and  Urbain  dared,  the  day  after,  to  propose  and 
have  put  to  vote  the  law  concerning  the  host- 
ages.” 

May  I add  another  important  citation  from  the 
same  source  ? There  were  in  the  revolt  of  1871 
three  distinct  phases : it  was  called  forth  and  exe- 
cuted by  the  republican  element  (1)  with  no  other 
programme  than  maintenance  of  the  republic ; 
was  then  made  use  of  and  organized  by  the  so- 
cialistic element  (2),  which  brought  to  it  the  con- 
siderable support  of  the  International ; it  then 
fell  rapidly  into  the  hands  of  revolutionists  prop- 
erly so  called  (3).  This  sad  evolution  brought 
into  pov/er  successively  the  central  committee  of 


WORKINGMEN  S ASSOCIATION. 


157 


tlie  national  guard,  the  Commune  of  Paris,  and 
the  committee  of  public  safety.”  * 

It  must  be  added,  however,  that  in  Paris  the 
International  identified  itself  with  the  Commune 
and  the  revolution  against  the  Assembly  at  Ver- 
sailles. One  of  its  best  members,  Tolain,  who, 
in  fact,  was  one  of  the  founders  of  the  Associa- 
tion, had  been  chosen  a member  of  the  French 
Assembly  and  took  his  seat.  The  federation  or 
section  to  which  he  belonged  passed  a vote,  after 
the  establishment  of  the  Commune,  that  he 
should  resign  his  place  in  the  national  legislature 
and  adhere  to  the  Commune,  or  lose  his  status  in 
the  International,  thus  making  opposition  to  the 
actual  organization  of  the  French  state  a condi- 
tion of  membership  in  that  body. 

3.  After  the  murder  of  the  hostages,  the  de- 
struction of  public  buildings,  and  the  attempted 
burning  of  the  city,  the  general  council  at  Lon- 
don published  a manifesto  to  all  the  members  of 
the  Association  in  Europe  and  the  United  States.” 
Their  object  is  to  put  the  best  face  possible 
on  the  transactions  during  the  capture  of  Paris, 
and  to  lay  the  blame  on  the  soldiers  of  the  gov- 
ernment and  on  M.  Thiers.  ‘‘  In  war,  they  say, 
fire  is  an  entirely  righteous  weapon.  Buildings 
occupied  by  an  enemy  are  bombarded  only  to  set 


* La  Commune,  pp.  8,  9.  By  Bourloton  et  Robert.  Paris, 
1872. 


158 


THE  INTERNATIONAL 


them  on  fire.  The  Commune  used  fire,  in  the 
strictest  sense  of  the  word,  as  a means  of  de- 
fence.” The  putting  to  death  of  the  hostages  was 
the  fault  of  the  government  at  Versailles,  who 
refused  to  give  up  Blanqui  in  exchange  for  Arch- 
bishop Darboy  and  a large  number  of  clerical  and 
other  persons.  A strange  operation  this,  to  seize 
upon  a large  number  of  innocent  men  within  the 
towm,  peaceable  persons  who  had  no  connection 
with  the  enemy  outside,  and  make  them  hostages 
for  a single  man  taken  in  war. 

We  have  no  space  to  dwell  on  this  manifesto 
further,  except  to  say  that  by  its  malignant  spirit 
and  useless  palliation  of  crimes  on  which  man- 
kind look  with  horror,  it  made  them  its  own.  It 
hurt  the  cause  for  which  it  was  written.  Two  of 
the  council  gave  up  their  places  on  account  of  it. 
It  gave  ground  to  the  French  government  for 
the  enactment  of  a law  against  all  who  should  be- 
come members  of  the  International  Working- 
men’s Association,  or  any  other  society  with  simi- 
lar doctrines,  or  who  should  aid  and  co-operate 
in  spreading  its  doctrines  or  letting  it  have  a hall 
for  the  purposes  of  meeting,  etc. 

The  effect  of  the  events  at  Paris  was — whether 
the  impression  were  true  or  not — to  identify  the 
International  with  bloody  insurrections  against 
established  order  and  to  keep  it  under  the  in- 
spection of  the  police  in  almost  every  country 
in  Europe.  Henceforth  it  would  tend  more 


workingmen’s  association. 


159 


and  more  to  become  a secret  society,  and,  there- 
fore, would  have  less  efficiency,  would  dwin- 
dle away,  would  lose  principle,  and  become  des- 
perate. 


160 


LEADING  FEATURES  OF 


CHAPTEK  V. 

I. 

LEADING  FEATURES  OP  THE  THEORY  OP  MARX. 

We  have  already  made  the  remark  that  there 
were  two  changes  in  the  direction  which  socialism 
took  after  the  revolutions  in  1848.  One  of  them 
was,  that  it  became  more  international,  and  strove 
to  unite  the  operatives  of  Europe  in  a common 
movement.  The  other  was,  that  it  made  the  field 
of  political  economy  in  a greater  degree  the  battle- 
ground for  the  new  order  of  things.  We  do  not 
mean  to  say  that  this  branch  of  social  philosophy 
had  not  been  already  used  as  an  armory  of  wea- 
pons against  the  existing  relations  of  capital  and 
labor;  or  that  the  socialists  of  all  countries  had 
previously  been  entirely  isolated  in  their  action  ; 
but  that  these  changes  of  direction  are  more 
obvious,  and  played  a more  important  part  after 
the  period  indicated  than  before.  The  Interna- 
tional movement  in  its  first  and  most  active 
period,  down  to  1872,  we  have  already  consid- 
ered, and  have  seen  that  Marx,  with  other  Ger- 
mans, had  much  to  do  with  it.  The  same  emi- 


THE  THEORY  OF  MARX. 


161 


nent  socialist  gave  to  the  theory  and  claims  of 
socialism  the  form  which  at  the  present  time  is 
most  current,  especially  in  Germany.  It  will  be 
our  endeavor  to  give  the  leading  features  of  his 
economic  theory,  so  far  as  they  are  necessary  for 
the  understanding  of  the  present  standpoint  of 
the  leading  socialists  and  of  their  party. 

In  1859  Marx  gave  to  the  world  a small  work, 
entitled  “For  the  Criticism  of  Political  Econ- 
omy;” and  in  1867  an  enlargement  and  continua- 
tion of  the  same,  under  the  title  of  Capital : a 
Critique  on  Political  Economy.”  The  first  vol- 
ume, which  is  all  that  has  appeared,  and  which 
contains  only  Book  First,  ‘‘The  Process  of  the 
Production  of  Capital,”  appeared  first  in  1867, 
and  again  in  1872,  somewhat  enlarged,  so  as  to 
form  a volume  of  822  pages.  The  work,  written 
in  the  dialect  of  the  Hegelian  philosophy,  with  a 
terminology  of  its  own,  is  not  readily  understood, 
and  is  more  like  a production  of  Thomas  Aquinas 
than  like  an  essay  of  Cairnes  or  Eoscher.  In  the 
preface  to  the  first  edition  Marx  complains  that 
Lassalle,  in  his  work  attacking  Schulze-Delitzsch, 
is  guilty  of  seriously  misunderstanding  it.  I must 
endeavor,  with  the  help  of  others,  to  present  the 
simplest  outline  that  I can  of  the  most  fundamen- 
tal points  in  Marx’s  work,  which  rest  on  no  newly 
discovered  truths,  but  on  such  as  Adam  Smith 
and  Ricardo  long  since  made  familiar  to  the  stu- 
dents  of  political  economy. 


162 


LEADING  FEATURES  OF 


The  principal  lever  of  Marx  against  the  present 
form  of  industry,  and  of  the  distribution  of  its 
results,  is  the  doctrine  that  value — that  is,  value 
in  exchange  — is  created  by  labor  alone.  Isow 
this  value,  as  ascertained  by  exchanges  in  the 
market  or  measured  by  some  standard,  does  not 
actually  all  go  to  the  laborer,  in  the  shape  of 
wages.  Perhaps  a certain  number  of  yards  of 
cotton  cloth,  for  instance,  when  sold,  actually  pay 
for  the  wages  of  laborers  and  leave  a surplus, 
which  the  employer  appropriates.  Perhaps  six 
hours  of  labor  per  diem  might  enable  the  laborer 
to  create  products  enough  to  support  himself  and 
to  rear  up  an  average  family ; but  at  present  he 
has  to  work  ten  hours  for  his  subsistence.  Where 
do  the  results  of  the  four  additional  hours  go? 
To  the  employer,  and  the  capitalist  from  whom 
the  employer  borrows  money ; or  to  the  employer 
who  also  is  a capitalist  and  invests  his  capital  in 
his  works,  with  a view  to  a future  return.  The 
laborer  works,  and  brings  new  workmen  into  the 
world,  who  in  turn  do  the  same.  The  tendency 
of  wages  being  toward  an  amount  just  sufficient 
for  the  maintenance  of  the  labor,  there  is  no  hope 
for  the  future  class  of  laborers.  Nor  can  compe- 
tition or  concurrence  help  the  matter.  A concur- 
rence of  capitalists  will  tend  to  reduce  wages  to 
the  minimum,  if  other  conditions  remain  as  they 
were  before.  A concurrence  of  laborers  may  raise 
wages  above  the  living  point  for  a while ; but 


THE  THEORY  OE  MARX. 


1G3 


these  fall  again,  through  the  stimulus  which  high 
wages  give  to  the  increase  of  population.  A gen- 
eral fall  of  profits  may  lower  the  price  of  articles 
used  by  laborers  i but  the  effect  of  this  is  not  to 
add  in  the  end  to  the  laborer’s  share.  He  can 
live  at  less  expense,  it  is  true,  but  he  will  need 
and  will  get  lower  wages.  Thus  the  system  of 
labor  and  capital  is  a system  of  robbery.  The 
capitalist  is  an  ^^expropriator”  who  must  be  “ex- 
propriated,” as  Marx  expresses  it.  A just  system 
can  never  exist  as  long  as  wages  are  determined 
by  free  contract  between  laborers  and  employers ; 
that  is,  as  long  as  the  means  of  carrying  on  pro- 
duction are  in  private  hands.  The  only  cure  for 
the  evils  of  the  present  industrial  system  is  the 
destruction  of  private  property — so  far,  at  least, 
as  it  is  used  in  production ; and  the  substitution 
of  the  state,  or  of  bodies  or  districts  controlled  by 
the  state,  for  the  private  owner  of  the  means  of 
production.  Instead  of  a number  of  classes  in 
society,  especially  instead  of  a bourgeoisie  and 
a proletariat^  there  must  be  but  one  class,  which 
works  directly  or  indirectly  for  the  state,  and  re- 
ceives as  wages  what  the  state  decides  to  give  to 
tliem.  The  state,  it  is  taken  for  granted,  will 
give  in  return  for  hours  of  labor  as  much  as  can 
be  afforded,  consistently  with  the  interests  Of 
future  labor  and  with  the  expenses  necessary  for 
carrying  on  the  state  system  itself.  Whether 
wages  under  this  kind  of  social  order  will  be  really 


164 


LEADING  FEATURES  OF 


greater  than  they  are  now ; whether  the  amount 
of  comforts  and  of  enjoytnents  will  be  increased — 
these  questions  we  may  consider  hereafter.  We 
now  content  ourselves  with  remarking  that  the 
laborer  has  and  can  have  no  effective  choice  in 
regard  to  employment,  or  amount  of  wages,  or 
place  of  abode,  if  the  state  is  to  be  the  great  em- 
ployer and  capitalist.  His  work  must  be  forced 
work ; and  there  must  be  a return  to  what  is,  in 
substance,  the  same  as  mediaeval  serfdom,  when 
the  serf  owned  no  land  and  worked  part  of  the 
time  to  maintain  his  master  and  a part  of  the 
time  to  maintain  himself. 

Marx,  if  we  are  not  in  an  error,  nowhere  shows 
the  injustice  of  private  property ; but,  rather,  as- 
sumes that  it  is  not  an  institution  of  natural  law. 
Nor  does  he  expound  the  steps  by  which  the  ex- 
propriator is  to  be  expropriated  ” — a maxim  which 
would  seem  to  denote  restitution  of  property  to  its 
natural  owner,  and  hence,  the  right  of  the  state 
to  be  the  supreme  owner  of  ail  property.  When 
this  is  assumed,  the  only  way  of  getting  rid  of 
the  evils  of  the  present  social  plan  is  a wholesale 
confiscation  of  private  property,  or  the  abolition 
of  the  right  of  inheritance,  which  would  even- 
tually bring  about  the  same  result ; or  confiscation, 
not  taking  effect  all  at  once,  so  as  to  pauperize  the 
property-holder,  but  making  him  some  compensa- 
tion for  a term  of  years.  We  have  not  found 
any  declarations  of  Marx  as  to  the  practical  way 


THE  THEORY  OF  MARX. 


165 


of  introducing  the  socialistic  state,  which  is  cer- 
tainly a matter  of  very  vast  importance.  But  to 
this  we  shall  recur  in  the  sequel. 

We  had  intended  to  give  our  readers  some  idea 
of  the  system  of  Marx  and  an  explanation  of  his 
new  and  most  ingeniously  contrived  technical 
terms ; but  the  attempt  within  our  limits  would 
be  hopeless,  and  we  should  reach  nothing  really 
original.  We  shall  confine  our  remarks  to  the 
fundamental  principle  that  whatever  is  exchanged 
is  work  put  into  products.  It  is  only  the  quan- 
tum of  socially  necessary  work,”  says  he,  ‘‘or  the 
work-time  socially  necessary  for  the  production  of 
a value  in  use,  which  determines  its  amount  of 
value”  (^.  of  its  value  in  exchange).  “Wares 
in  which  equally  great  quantities  of  Avork  are  con- 
tained, or  which  can  be  produced  in  the  same 
work-time,  have,  therefore,  the  same  amount  of 
value.  The  value  of  a ware  has  tlie  same  propor- 
tion to  the  value  of  another  ware,  as  the  time 
necessary  for  the  production  of  the  one  has  to  the 
time  necessary  for  the  production  of  the  other.” 

It  is,  indeed,  true  that  the  same  amount  of 
labor  incorporated  in  two  “ wares  ” or  articles  will 
give  them  equal  value  in  exchange,  so  far  as  the 
factor  of  labor  comes  into  the  estimate ; but  it  is 
not  true  that  the  amount  of  labor  is  the  only 
source  of  value.  It  is  impossible  to  count  hours’ 
work  in  different  employments  as  having  the  same 
value ; or  to  put  difficult  or  dangerous  work  by 


1C6 


LEADING  FEATURES  OF 


the  side  of  easy  or  safe  work,  as  though  they 
ought  to  be  subjected  to  the  same  measure ; or  to 
give  equal  rewards  to  intellectual  and  artistic 
work  and  to  that  performed  by  the  common 
operative.  Then,  again,  taste  displayed  in  a pro- 
duction of  labor  will  give  it  a preference  over 
one  where  the  pattern  or  mode  of  execution  is 
clumsy.  The  same  labor  may  be  spent  on  an 
ugly  calico  as  on  a pretty  one ; but  in  no  state  of 
society — not  even  in  a socialistic  republic — ^will 
the  ugly  one  exchange  with  other  commodities 
on  equal  terms  with  the  handsome  one.  In  the 
same  way  in  other  cases,  supply  and  demand  af- 
fect all  the  objects  brought  into  market,  on  ac- 
count of  their  plenty  or  scarcity,  or  on  account  of 
their  different  capacity  to  gratify  some  desire  of 
man. 

But  it  is  far  more  to  our  purpose  to  remark 
that  the  employer  is  a vital  factor  in  all  work 
which  requires  time  for  its  completion,  which  is 
conducted  on  a large  scale,  which  requires  many 
hands  and  careful  supervision,  and  which  needs 
knowledge  of  the  money  market,  of  the  labor 
market,  of  public  taste  and  public  demand.  Nor 
is  the  employer  necessary  in  the  present  relations 
only  of  the  laborer  and  the  employer ; but,  what- 
ever be  the  form  of  society,  he  or  somebody  dis- 
charging his  functions  wdll  be  found  necessary. 
Some  such  man  could  not  be  dispensed  with  in 
the  co-operative  industry  of  workmen.  One  or 


THE  THEORY  OF  MARX. 


167 


more  of  their  number  would  be  required  to  do 
those  duties  which  are  necessary  in  order  to  suc- 
cessful production.  And  so,  if  the  state  shall 
ever  take  the  place  of  all  other  employers  and 
capitalists,  it  will  not  fail  to  need  supervisors  and 
agents  without  number,  in  procuring,  for  instance, 
raw  material,  in  keeping  up  instruments  of  pro- 
duction, in  paying  laborers  for  their  hours’  toil,  in 
deciding  what  will  best  suit  the  market,  in  keep- 
ing accounts,  in  providing  for  sales. 

The  importance  of  the  employer  is  also  shown 
by  the  fact,  common  enough,  that  many  who  start 
a manufacturing  business  fail,  because  they  have 
not  the  ability  or  judgment  or  knowledge  that  is 
requisite  for  success.  I7o  skill  or  industry  of  the 
operatives  themselves  can  render  the  employer 
useless,  and  it  is  on  his  ability  or  want  of  ability 
that  everything  depends.  If  he  is  not  a capital- 
ist, he  must,  also,  provide  funds  by  borrowing 
from  some  canitalist  for  the  raw  material  and  for 
the  wages,  which  are  paid  before  the  products  are 
finished  and  ready  for  sale.  He  must  establish 
connections  with  men  who  can  sell  the  products ; 
he  must  be  able  to  judge  what  products  it  is  most 
advantageous  to  manufacture ; he  must  thus  cal- 
culate well  the  future  probabilities  as  to  quantity 
and  kind  of  products ; his  taste  and  judgment,  to  a 
great  extent,  makes  products  salable ; — he  must, 
in  short,  be  a far-seeing  man,  with  a general’s 
ability  to  dispose  of  all  the  parts  of  his  army,  so 


168 


LEADING  FEATURES  OF 


that  they  shall  support  one  another.  He,  finally, 
takes  all  risks  upon  himself,  while  the  operatives 
are  generally  sure  of  their  w^ages. 

Now,  the  question  is : Can  or  should  the  man 
on  whom  so  much  depends  be  thrown  out  of  cal- 
culation and  treated  as  of  no  account  ? Is  it  not 
for  the  interests  of  all  that  he  should  have  a con- 
siderable share — if  the  year’s  work  turns  out  well 
— in  the  proceeds  of  the  articles  which  he,  in  fact, 
has  greatly  contributed  to  create  ? And  will  not, 
for  the  most  part,  his  profits  go  to  the  benefit 
of  labor,  and  by  accumulation  of  profits,  cheapen 
the  prices  of  all  commodities,  and  in  the  end 
benefit  the  entire  community,  laborers  and  others  ? 
Tills  is  but  a balance  against  the  risks  and  losses 
to  which  employers  and  capitalists  are  subject, 
and  which  are  disastrous  to  laborers,  although 
tlie}^  receive  their  full  amount  of  wages. 

The  measure  of  remuneration  for  work  is  time, 
according  to  Marx’s  system.  The  differences  of 
influence  upon  the  amount  produced  by  skilled 
and  unskilled,  efficient  and  inefficient  work,  by  a 
capacity  to  meet  the  ends  for  which  a particular 
industry  is  set  on  foot,  and  by  labor  little  above 
brute  force,  are  not  estimated.  Work  is  work, 
and  all  wdio  work  an  hour  are  paid  alike.  The 
treatment  of  the  superintendent  is  in  conformity 
with  this  kind  of  equalization.  If  he  is  fit  for 
the  business,  his  management  alone  meets  the  ends 
of  united  industry  in  a special  form.  But  if  he 


THE  THEORY  OF  MARX. 


169 


is  the  pivot  on  which  everything  turns,  he  ouglit 
in  justice  to  be  rewarded  for  the  success  of  the 
undertaking,  unless  we  lay  it  down  that  the  end 
of  labor  is  to  support  life,  and  no  one  has  a claim 
to  anything  more. 

To  this  might  be  added,  that  the  amount  of  re- 
muneration to  the  capitalist  and  employer  is  a 
small  portion  of  the  whole  product  obtained  by  the 
joint  agency  of  capital  and  labor.  Mr.  Edward 
Atkinson,  a most  competent  judge,  says  that  in 
the  first  division  those  who  do  the  actual  work  of 
production,  either  of  the  raw  material  or  of  the 
finished  article,  must  get  ninety-five  to  ninety- 
seven  parts,  and  the  owner  of  capital  only  three 
to  five.”  And  from  these  three  to  five  parts 
taxes  and  private  expenses  must  be  drawn.  And 
Mr.  Mill,  in  the  chapter  on  Socialism,  recently 
published,  remarks  that  the  remuneration  of  capi- 
tal, as  such,  in  Great  Britain,  is  measured  by  the 
interest  on  the  funds,  which  is  about  three  and 
one-third  per  cent.  All  above  this  is  to  be  re- 
ferred to  the  employer’s  wages  of  superintend- 
ence, to  various  risks,  and  other  causes. 

If  there  were  any  other  plan  which  could  bring 
more  wages  to  operatives  and  more  prosperity  to 
all  parts  of  society,  let  it  be  by  all  means  tried  at 
once.  Suppose  that  all  the  profits  were  paid  over 
to  the  operatives ; would  that  mitigate  any  of  the 
evils  of  society?  By  no  means.  On  the  con- 
trary, all  capital  would  be  withdrawm  from  active 
8 


170 


LEADING  FEATURES  OF 


use,  for  no  employers  would  work  and  undergo 
risks  for  nothing. 

We  come,  then,  to  the  conclusion  that  work 
has  no  just  claim  to  the  entire  results  of  produc- 
tion. How  much  of  those  results  shall  it  appro- 
priate? Does  justice  or  the  good  of  society  de- 
mand that  it  shall  have  an  amount  which  may  he 
equal  to  the  supply  of  the  laborers’  necessities ; 
or  ought  it  to  be  more,  ought  it  to  be  very  much 
more?  Prof.  Cairnes  says  that  he  is  ^Hmaware 
of  any  rule  of  justice  applicable  to  the  problem 
of  distributing  the  produce  of  industry,”  and  that 
‘‘  any  attempt  to  give  effect  to  what  are  considered 
the  dictates  of  justice  which  should  involve,  as  a 
means  toward  that  end,  a disturbance  of  the  fun- 
damental assumptions  on  which  economic  reason- 
ing is  based — especially  those  of  the  right  of  pri- 
vate property  and  the  freedom  of  individual  in- 
dustry— would,  in  [his]  opinion,  putting^all  other 
than  material  considerations  aside,  be  inevitably 
followed  by  the  destruction  or  indefinite  curtail- 
ment of  the  fund  itself  from  which  the  remunera- 
tion of  all  classes  is  derived.” 

Some  of  the  workingmen  in  Germany,  who 
have  been  led  to  embrace  socialistic  views,  seem 
to  expect  that  in  the  new  socialistic  world  of  the 
future  all  the  returns  from  labor  will  go  to  the 
laborer;  for  instance,  that  a year’s  production  of 
cotton  cloth,  consisting  of  fifty  million  yards,  at 
ten  cents  the  yard,  or  §5,000,000,  would  liave  no 


THE  THEORY  OF  MARX. 


171 


deductions  made  from  it  by  the  new  employer — 
the  state.  But  this  is  as  far  as  possible  from  the 
truth,  unless  the  state  can  provide  raw  material, 
machinery,  and  buildings,  and  do  all  the  work 
which  an  employer  now  does,  from  some  other 
fund.  Nor  is  this  all ; for  the  state  must  provide 
for  its  own  proper  expenses  as  a political  body, 
besides  those  incurred  in  its  capacity  of  an  em- 
ployer, out  of  the  avails  of  the  workingman’s 
industry.  It  would  be  possible,  indeed,  to  pay 
all  alike  for  work-time,  to  put  the  employer  or 
supervisor  and  the  most  unskilled  workmen  on 
the  same  level,  laying  out  of  the  account  capacity 
and  the  importance  of  operations.  Whether  in 
practice  this  would  work  well  or  ill,  there  can  be 
but  one  opinion. 


II. 

FERDINAND  LASSALLE  AND  THE  GERMAN  WORKINGMEN’S 
UNION. 

Marx  and  Lassalle  were  the  two  leaders  in  the 
German  socialistic  movement ; but  the  former 
became  a cosmopolite  in  his  principles,  while  the 
other  was  a German  to  the  end  of  his  career. 
They  differed  widely  in  their  characteristics. 
Marx  is  cold  and  bitter.  He  is  more  of  a philos- 
opher than  of  an  orator ; he  lias  not  figured  so 
much  in  congresses  and  public  debates  as  in  lay- 
ing plans. for  spreading  social  doctrines.  Lassalle 


172 


FERDINAND  LASSALLE  AND  THE 


was  an  ardent  and  ambitious,  as  well  as  a pleasure- 
loving  man ; was  fond  of  admiration,  and  knew 
how  to  draw  to  himself  the  warm  sympathies  of 
the  people.  Marx  went  as  far  as  the  principles 
and  logic  of  his  socialism  could  carry  him.  Las- 
salle  went  half  way  in  his  socialistic  efforts ; lay- 
ing down  principles  which  in  the  hands  of  others 
might  overturn  society,  but  aiming  in  his  own 
efforts  at  no  direct  results,  and  planting  the  seeds 
of  thought  in  the  future,  as  if  the  triumph  of  his 
ideas  were  a great  way  off.  In  political  economy 
he  was  by  no  means  as  strong  as  Marx ; but  in 
historical  and  juristic  science  was  much  his  supe- 
rior. He  was,  indeed,  a man  of  splendid  endow- 
ments, and  only  needed  self-contrql  to  make  one 
of  the  most  eminent  jurists  or  scholars  of  his 
native  land.  But  he  was  driven  by  contrary 
forces,  so  that  he  fell  short  of  what  he  could  have 
accomplished  in  any  one  direction ; and  his  end 
disclosed  his  weakness.  A man  who  is  at  once  a 
scholar,  an  orator,  and  a man  of  pleasure,  cannot 
do  much  that  will  last.  Yet  his  high  endow- 
ments, his  almost  sovereign  position  at  the  head 
of  his  party,  and  his  qualities  which  gave  him 
power  over  common  men,  made  him  the  idol  of 
one  party  among  the  German  socialists,  while  he 
was  undervalued  and  disliked  by  the  other. 

Lassalle  was  born  in  Breslau,  in  1825,  the  son 
of  a rich  Jewish  merchant,  who  destined  him  for 
the  same  employment ; but,  preferring  a life  of 


GERMAN  workingmen’s  UNION. 


173 


study,  he  betook  himself  to  the  university,  where 
he  pursued  philosophy  and  law.  At  Berlin, 
where  he  intended  to  settle  as  a private  teacher, 
he  awakened  the  highest  admiration  of  William 
von  Humboldt  and  Boeckh.  Heinrich  Heine, 
whom  he  saw  at  Paris,  in  1815,  introduced  him 
to  Varnhagen  von  Ense,  in  these  terms:  “lie  is 
a young  man  of  the  most  distinguished  endow- 
ments, with  the  most  thorough  learning,  the  most 
extensive  knowledge,  the  greatest  acuteness  that 
have  ever  come  under  my  notice.  To  the  richest 
power  of  expression  he  unites  an  energy  of  will 
and  a skill  in  action  which  astonish  me.”  To 
this  he  adds  that  “ Lassalle  is  a genuine  son  of 
the  modern  time,  which  will  have  nothing  to  do 
with  self-restraint  and  discretion.” 

Lassalle’s  life  was  diverted  from  its  original 
purpose  by  an  acquaintance,  in  1845,  with  the 
Countess  of  Hatzfeld,  a Berlin  beauty,  forty  years 
old,  who  was  then  involved  in  a suit  for  divorce 
against  her  husband.  He  took  her  part  as  her 
counsel,  and  spent  the  best  portion  of  eight  years 
in  carrying  the  case  to  a successful  issue.  In 
1846  he  managed  to  get  possession  of  a casket 
containing  documents  important  for  his  client, 
and  was  tried  for  moral  complicity  in  a theft; 
but  was  acquitted,  on  the  ground  that  the  theft 
was  not  foreseen  by  him  but  originated  among  the 
servants  of  the  countess.  This  suit  led  to  lasting 
intimacy  between  the  parties.  He  received — as 


174 


FERDINAND  LxiSSALLE  AND  THE 


F.  Mehring,  in  his  Social  Democracy,”  says — a 
yearly  income  of  five  thonsand  thalers  from  the 
lady. 

Lassalle  entered  into  liis  relations  with  the 
countess  in  real  sympathy ; and  he  said,  a little 
before  his  death,  in  a letter  to  Huber,  that  his 
intervention  in  her  affairs  was  the  fact  in  his  life 
of  which  he  should  ever  continue  to  be  proud. 
But  they  brought  him  into  a circle  which  his 
critics  call  impure  misauber  and  he,  there- 
fore, comes  before  the  world  in  no  fdvorable 
light.  Is  there,”  asks  an  eminent  German,  von 
Treitschke,  abjectness  more  vulgar  than  dema- 
gogy over  truffles  and  champagne ; than  the  ca- 
rousing and  unchaste  life  of  an  adventurer,  which 
was  led  by  this  man  who  played  the  part  of  the 
saviour  of  the  suffering?  Even  in  France  good 
society  would,  without  mercy,  have  rejected  every 
one  who  took  part  in  the  elegant  g}^sy  life  of  the 
Ilatzfeld  circle.  Only  we  Germans,  with  our  in- 
complete social  ethics,  are  more  tolerant.” 

Until  the  spring  of  1857  Lassalle  lived  at  Diis- 
seldorf.  Here  he  took  part  in  movements  which 
brought  him  into  connection  with  Marx,  Engels, 
and  other  social  leaders  ; and  in  the  revolutionary 
year,  1848,  was  unsuccessfully  accused  of  inciting 
the  people  to  armed  violence.  He  was,  although 
not  convicted,  held  under  arrest,  and  was  subse- 
quently sentenced,  for  a very  trifling  offence,  to 
six  months’  imprisonment.  In  1857,  having  now 


GERMAN  WORKINGMEN  S UNION. 


175 


completed  tlie  law-suit  of  the  Countess  of  Hatz- 
feld,  he  returned  in  disguise  to  Berlin,  and  ere 
long  obtained  leave,  through  Wm.  von  Humboldt, 
to  remain  in  that  city.  In  the  same  year  he  pub- 
lished a work,  which  he  had  written  some  time 
before,  entitled  The  Philosophy  of  Heraclitus 
the  Obscure,  of  Ephesus,”  of  which  Ueberweg 
says  that  it  is  the  most  thorough  monograph  on 
the  subject,  but  that  the  author  is  at  times  too 
much  given  to  Hegelianizing.”  In  the  ensuing 
years  appeared  his  rhetorical  drama,  entitled 
‘^Francis  of  Sickingen,”  ‘‘The  Italian  War  and 
the  Task  of  Prussia  ” (1859),  “ Fichte’s  Political 
Legacy”  (1860),  with  “The  Philosophy  of  Fichte 
and  the  Meaning  of  the  Spirit  of  the  German 
People  ” (1862).  These  last-mentioned  works  were 
written  to  propagate  his  idea  of  a centralized  Ger- 
man democracy.  In  1861  he  published  his  “ Sys- 
tem of  Acquired  Rights,”  in  two  volumes,  the 
object  of  which  was  to  show  that  certain  rights  of 
vast  importance — such  as  property  and  inheri- 
tance— are  really  historical,  and  not  jural;  that 
is,  that  they  arose  in  circumstances  which  justified 
their  recognition,  but  that  certain  other  circum- 
stances might  require  their  abolition.  The  sec- 
ond volume  is  occupied  with  the  question  of  in- 
heritance. This  is  a very  learned  attack  on  the 
present  constitution  of  society,  and  an  argument 
to  prove  that  a social  state  may  have  a right  to 
exist.  In  this  work  he  already  caught  up  the 


176 


FERDINAND  LASSALLE  AND  THE 


doctrine  of  Marx,  first  announced  in  his  Critique 
of  Political  Economy  ” (1859),  that  the  value  of 
work  acquired  in  production  must  wholly  belong 
to  the  workman. 

A little  after  the  publication  of  this  work  Las- 
salle  delivered  a lecture,  which  was  published 
under  the  title  of  “ The  Workingmen’s  Pro- 
gramme,” on  the  special  connection  of  the  pres- 
ent period  of  history  with  the  idea  of  the  labor- 
ing class.  The  object  of  this  was  to  show  the 
rise  and  growth  of  the  classes  that  lay  outside  of 
feudalism,  from  the  feudal  times  until  the  pres- 
ent. The  political  condition  and  importance  in 
society  of  these  classes  has  been  growing  until 
now.  First  the  hourgeosie  and  the  men  of  capi- 
tal emerged  from  the  insignificance  they  had  in 
the  feudal  ages.  Then  the  laboring  class,  res- 
cued from  serfdom,  began  to  claim  power  and  the 
reform  of  social  evils.  We  are  at  this  point  of  a 
progress  which  must  of  necessity  go  onward  by 
revolution  or  reform. 

In  May,  1863,  Lassalle  founded  the  German 
it  Workingmen’s  Union,”  which  was  somewhat 
more  than  a year  older  than  the  International. 
Its  object  confined  it  to  the  States  of  the  German 
Confederation,  and  it  arose  out  of  the  conviction 
that  only  by  general,  equal,  and  direct  suffrage  a 
satisfactory  representation  of  the  social  interests  of 
the  German  operative  class  can  be  brought  about,” 
etc.  Lassalle  was  to  preside  over  this  Union  for 


GERMAN  workingmen’s  UNION. 


177 


five  years  with  almost  autocratic  power — sub- 
ject, indeed,  to  a committee  or  council,  but  to  one 
scattered  over  Germany,  which  could  seldom  be 
brought  together.  This  post  he  filled  with  an 
energy  and  a consumption  of  vital  force  that  few, 
if  any,  agitators  have  equalled.  His  writings  from 
this  period  until  his  death  were  devoted  to  social 
questions.  His  speeches  and  addresses  were  nu- 
merous. The  working  class  heard  him  gladly. 
He  effected  a separation  between  the  socialists  of 
his  party  and  those  persons  who  looked  for  relief 
to  the  plans  suggested  by  the  Progressive  Party, 
as  it  was  called ; or,  in  other  words,  he  detached 
the  workingmen  from  the  iourgeosie^  or  third 
estate.  But  his  success  was  by  no  means  as  great 
as  he  hoped  for.  The  vital  power  of  the  move- 
ment was  concentrated  in  the  head,  and  could  not 
be  sufficiently  diffused  through  the  members. 
The  International  continually  asked,  in  its  num- 
berless meetings,  local  and  general : What  shall 
we  do  ? ’’  They  had  definite  aims ; but  Lassalle’s 
organization  did  little  more  than  convoke  men  to 
listen  to  a powerful  and  eloquent  chief.  His  po- 
sition, again,  which  confined  the  Union  to  Ger- 
many, making  it  simply  national,  was  a false  one. 
As  another  remarks,  socialism,  as  such,  is  univer- 
sal ; and,  if  it  is  the  true  remedy  for  social  evils, 
it  ought  to  be  proclaimed  everywhere.  The 
Union,  again,  by  means  of  personal  rivalries,  was 
brought  into  a false  relation  toward  the  Interna- 


178 


FERDINAND  LASSALLE  AND  THE 


tional.  They  could  not  unite  and  they  could  not 
both  thrive  in  Germany.  Finally,  when  univer- 
sal suffrage  was  introduced  into  the  North  Ger- 
man Confederation,  in  1867,  the  main  object  for 
which  the  Union  was  founded  was  accomplished ; 
for  its  objects,  or  the  objects  of  the  party  repre- 
sented by  it,  could  be  either  attained  in  the  Reichs- 
tag, through  its  representatives  there,  or  some- 
thing, beyond  that  which  was  contemplated  in 
the  existing  organization,  must  be  sought  for. 
It  is  not  strange,  then,  that  the  small  fruits  of  his 
agitation  were  extremely  disheartening  to  Lassalle. 

His  discouragement  appears  strikingly  in  an 
extract  from  a letter  written  in  the  last  year  of 
his  life : 

“New  supplies  of  money  I cannot  get ; and  just  as  little 
can  I let  the  Union  go  to  the  ground  as  long  as  hope  beckons 
to  me  in  the  political  heaven.  ...  I am  deadly  weary  ; and, 
strong  as  my  constitution  is,  it  trembles  to  the  very  marrow. 
My  excitement  is  so  great  that  I can  no  longer  sleep  by  night 
I roll  about  until  five  o’clock,  and  arise  with  headache,  ut- 
terly exhausted.  I am  overworked,  overstrained,  over- 
wearied to  a fearful  degree.  The  mad  effort  to  complete 
the  ‘ Bastiat- Schulze  ’ [one  of  his  latest  works  against  Mr. 
Schulze  von  Delitzsch,  leader  of  the  Progressive  Party],  be- 
sides everything  else,  in  three  months,  the  deep  and  painful 
discovery  of  my  delusion,  the  gnawing  internal  vexation 
with  which  the  indifference  and  apathy  of  the  working  class, 
taken  as  a whole,  fills  me,  are  together  too  much  even  for 
me.” 

In  tlie  summer  of  1861  lie  attended  tlie  festi- 
val of  the  foundation  of  the  Union,  which  was 


GERMAN  workingmen’s  UNION. 


179 


celebrated  in  Rhenish  Prussia.  Here  he  was  re- 
ceived by  the  workingmen  with  tiimultnous  ap- 
plause. Next  he  visited  several  watering-places 
of  Germany  and  Switzerland.  His  death  was 
due  to  his  unregulated  mind,  which  gave  itself 
lip  to  pride  and  passion.  He  had  become  enam- 
ored of  a young  lady  in  Munich,  who  rejected  his 
addresses,  preferring  another  man.  Lassalle  chal- 
lenged his  rival,  and  was  shot  dead  by  him,  Au- 
gust 31,  1864. 

No  one  can  scruple  to  call  Lassalle  a socialist 
in  the  sense  of  that  word  which  implies  a denial 
of  the  right  of  private  individual  property  and  a 
desire  to  make  the  working  class  the  only  order 
in  the  state.  But  he  did  not  express  his  views 
very  clearly,  and  had  no  plans  of  immediate 
change  in  the  institutions  of  society.  His  policy 
was  to  agitate ; to  set  the  minds  of  the  laboring 
class  at  work  in  preparation  for  a mild  and  peace- 
ful overturning  in  the  future.  One  of  his  plans, 
which  is  not  absolutely  socialistic,  was  the  found- 
ing of  productive  associations,  which  differed  from 
Louis  Blanc’s  workshops  mainly  in  this, — that 
they  were  not  got  up  by  the  state,  but  by  unions 
of  operatives,  on  the  credit  of  the  state.  There 
was  also  an  insurance  union  embraced  in  the  pro- 
ject, for  the  purpose  of  making  up  local  losses  of 
the  associations  by  the  help  of  profits  elsewhere 
made.  The  managers  of  the  several  productive 
associations  in  every  place  were  to  pay  weekly 


180 


FERDINAND  LASSALLE  AND  THE 


wages  to  the  laborers,  and  would  be  united  to- 
gether in  one  vast  union.  That  this  plan  was 
practicable  and  could  be  extremely  lucrative 
could  be  denied,”  he  says,  ‘^only  by  the  igno- 
rance to  which  it  is  unknown  that  both  in  Eng- 
land and  in  France  numerous  workingmen’s  as- 
sociations subsist,  which  depend  entirely  on  the 
efforts  of  the  isolated  laborers  who  belong  to 
them,  and  yet  have  reached  a high  degree  of  pros- 
perity.” Vfe  believe  that  this  device  is  altogether 
discarded  by  the  most  advanced  socialists. 

Lassalle  made  more  of  the  ^^iron  law”  of  wages 
in  his  agitations  than  of  any  other  single  doctrine 
of  political  economy.  He  explains  it  thus : The 
iron  economical  law,  which  in  existing  relations, 
under  the  control  of  supply  and  demand  for  work, 
determines  the  wages  of  work,  is  this : that  the 
average  wages  always  continue  reduced  to  the 
means  of  living  which  are  required  in  a nation, 
according  to  the  usages  there  prevailing,  for  per- 
petuating existence  and  propagating  children.” 
There  is  nothing  to  complain  of  in  this  statement 
of  the  law,  except  first  that  wages  are  generally 
above  the  sum  necessary  for  supporting  and  sup- 
plying labor — that  is,  are  above  the  minimum ; and 
that  more  has  been  paid  on  the  average  is  shown 
by  strikes  and  savings-banks,  by  the  great  contri- 
butions to  trades-unions,  and  the  vast  sums  spent 
for  useless  or  hurtful  drinks.  But,  again,  is  he 
not  in  a great  error  when  he  imputes  this  iron 


GERMAN  workingmen’s  UNION. 


181 


law  ” to  the  relations  in  society  as  it  now  exists, 
to  supply  and  demand,  and  free  contract  between 
laborer  and  employer  ? Must  it  not  be  called  a 
law  of  nature,  inevitably  growing  out  of  tlie  in- 
citements to  the  increase  of  population  in  the 
working  class  ? Kicardo’s  doctrine  of  wages  was 
founded  on  the  law  of  population,  as  interpreted 
by  Maltlius.  As  far  as  we  can  see,  it  might  just 
as  much  affect  a society  where  the  government 
was  the  sole  employer  and  capitalist,  as  it  affects 
a society  where  free  contract  and  wages  paid  by 
the  employer  are  in  vogue.  A high  remuneration 
paid  by  the  state  to  all  its  laborers — that  is,  to  the 
whole  population  of  the  social  state — would  en- 
courage population  just  as  high  wages  do  now. 
And  there  is  this  advantage  on  the  side  of  present 
usage,  that  now  the  laborer  feels  some  responsi- 
bility for  rearing  a family  ; but  then  he  would 
lean  wholly  on  the  state.  This  could  be  prevent- 
ed only  by  the  despotical  act,  on  the  state’s  part, 
of  making  marriage  a crime,  if  contracted  with- 
out the  state’s  license,  or  by  preventing  it  in  some 
other  way. 


III. 

SOCIALISM  IN  GERMANY  SINCE  LASSALLE. 

After  Lassalle’s  death  the  election  of  persons 
of  much  less  importance  to  the  office  of  presi- 
dent of  the  Workingmen’s  Union,  and  the  in- 


182  SOCIALISM  IN  GERMANY  SINCE  LASSALLE. 

trigues  of  the  Countess  of  Hatzfeld,  by  which 
tlie  members  of  the  Union  were  divided  into  two 
factions,  retarded  its  progress ; but  the  choice  of 
Alexander  Schweitzer,  in  1867,  brought  back  a 
hope  of  prosperity.  He  was  from  Franlrfort, 
had  studied  law,  and  was  editor  of  the  Social 
Democrat^  the  organ  of  the  Union.  Mehring,  in 
his  German  Social  Democracy,”  calls  him  a 
voluptuary,  full  of  esjorit^  who  was  too  prudent 
and  of  too  strong  a character  to  waste  himself 
wholly  in  sensual  pleasure.”  He  had,  during  his 
five  years  of  official  connection  with  the  Union, 
enemies  within  and  without  its  pale.  The  friends 
of  the  International  in  Germany  felt  that  their 
time  was  come  to  unite  all  the  socialists  of  that 
race  under  one  banner.  They  professed  to  sus- 
pect him  of  being  in  secret  understanding  with 
tjie  government  of  Prussia;  and  his  political 
views,  favoring  the  centralization  which  was  ef- 
fected in  1867,  were  diametrically  opposite  to 
tliose  of  German  Internationalists,  such  as  Lieb- 
knecht  and  Bebel.  This  faction  first  managed  to 
alter  the  constitution  of  the  Union,  so  as  to 
alyrid'je  the  power  of  its  president ; but  when 
Schweitzer  persuaded  the  members  to  put  things 
in  their  old  place  again,  and  effected  a junction 
with  the  Hatzfeld  faction,  a new  organization, 
outside  of  the  Union  and  antagonistic  to  it,  was 
felt  to  be  necessary.  At  a general  assembly  Lieb- 
knecht  declared  that  Schweitzer  must  be  got  rid 


SOCIALISM  IN  GERMANY  SINCE  LASSALLE.  183 


of,  as  one  who  was  seeking,  in  the  interests  of  the 
Prussian  government,  to  prevent  united  action 
among  the  workingmen.  In  a congress  sum- 
moned by  the  International  party,  and  to  which 
the  members  of  the  Union  were  invited,  after 
violent  disputes,  the  Social  Democratic  Work- 
ingmen’s Party  ” was  founded  by  Liebknecht  and 
his  friends,  in  August,  1869.  In  the  other  organi- 
zation Schweitzer  held  his  own  for  several  years. 
One  of  his  plans  was  to  build  up  a general  sys- 
tem of  trades-unions,  and  thus  to  encourage 
strikes.  These  differed  from  Lassalle’s  produc- 
tive associations  in  this,  that  they  could  act  un- 
der the  existing  conditions  of  industry.  Strikes 
were  not  promoted  as  directly  favoring  socialistic 
changes,  which  they  could  not  effect ; but  as  cal- 
culated to  awaken  the  class  feeling  of  operatives, 
and  as  helping  to  do  away  with  some  of  the  exist- 
ing grievances.  But  strikes  met  wdth  encourage- 
ment also  from  tlie  Party  of  Progress,  which  had 
no  social  leanings  and  considered  private  capital 
necessary,  yet  on  humane  principles  strove  to 
meliorate  the  condition  of  the  working  class. 

In  1871  Schweitzer  failed  of  being  re-elected 
to  the  office  of  president  of  the  Union,  and  was 
succeeded  b}^  a man  named  Ilasenclever.  Its 
prosperity  after  this  depended  much  on  its  jour- 
nal, the  new  Social  Democrat. 

The  programme  of  the  Social  Democratic 
Workingmen’s  Party,  constituted  at  Eisenach,  in 


184  SOCIALISM  IN  GER]\IANY  SINCE  LASSALLE. 

1869,  seems  to  have  been  shreivdly  intended  to 
be  so  indefinite,  and  to  have  snch  a squint  toward 
the  two  opposing  parties,  that  it  could  succeed  in 
detaching  numbers  of  adherents  of  Lassalle  from 
their  old  faith  without  their  being  aware  that 
tliey  were  deserting  their  colors.  Some  of  the 
principles,  which  every  member  of  this  party 
binds  himself  to  accept,  are  “equal  riglits  and 
equal  duties  of  all,  and  the  doing  away  of  all 
class  supremacy ; ” the  getting  rid  of  the  present 
method  of  production  (by  means  of  wages),  and 
the  securing,  by  means  of  associated  work,  to 
each  laborer  of  the  full  returns  of  his  labor. 
On  the  ground  that  the  social  question  cannot  be 
separated  from  the  political,  they  aim  at  its  solu- 
tion in  the  democratic  state,  where  alone  it  is  pos- 
sible. “ In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  freedom  of 
work  is  neither  a local  nor  a national,  but  a social 
problem,  which  embraces  all  lands  where  modern 
society  exists,  the  Social  Democratic  Working- 
men’s Party  considers  itself,  so  far  as  the  laws  of 
the  [North  German]  Union  allow,  to  be  a branch 
of  the  International  Workingmen’s  Association, 
to  the  plans  and  efforts  of  which  it  gives  its  adhe- 
sion.” 

The  immediate  demands  to  be  put  forw^ard  in 
the  “ agitation  ” carried  on  by  the  party  are  such 
as  these:  (1.)  The  universal,  equal,  direct,  and 
secret  right  to  election  of  all  men  twenty  years 
old  into  the  parliament,  the  diets  of  the  single 


SOCIALISM  IN  GERMANY  SINCE  LASSALLE.  185 


states,  the  provincial  and  communal  assemblies, 
as  well  as  into  all  other  representative  bodies.  To 
the  representatives  thus  elected  sufficient  pay  is 
to  be  allowed.  (2.)  Introduction  of  direct  legisla- 
tion by  the  people — that  is,  the  right  of  proposing 
laws  and  of  rejecting  laws  passed  by  legislatures. 
(3.)  Abolition  of  all  privileges,  of  rank,  birth,  and 
confession.  (4.)  The  institution  of  a militia,  in- 
stead of  the  standing  army.  (5.)  Separation  of 
the  church  from  the  state,  and  of  the  school  from 
the  church.  (6.)  Obligatory  instruction  in  com- 
mon schools,  and  gratuitous  instruction  in  all  pub- 
lic institutions  for  polite  education.  (7.)  Inde- 
pendence of  courts,  introduction  of  juries,  of 
courts  composed  of  experts,  of  public  and  oral 
judicial  proceedings,  and  of  gratuitous  adminis- 
tration of  justice.  (8.)  Abolition  of  all  laws  re- 
lating to  the  press,  to  unions,  and  coalitions ; the 
definition  of  a normal  day’s  work ; limitation  of 
the  amount  of  work  done  by  women ; and  pro- 
hibition of  the  work  of  children.  (9.)  Aboli- 
tion of  all  indirect  taxes,  and  introduction  of  a 
single  direct,  progressive  income  tax  and  inheri- 
tance tax.  (10.)  Help  from  the  state  to  associa- 
tions (of  laborers),  and  the  state’s  credit  for  free 
productive  associations  under  democratic  guaran- 
tees. 

This  last  demand  was,  without  doubt,  inserted 
to  please  the  followers  of  Lassalle,  and  could  not 
have  been  acceptable  to  the  Internationalists  of 


186  SOCIALISM  IN  GEKMANY  SINCE  LASSALLE. 

the  party.  Many  of  the  others  are  reasonable  and 
just.  That  under  No.  9 throws  the  burden  of 
taxation  on  the  rich,  and  could  be  used  for  the  pur- 
pose of  taxing  inheritances  to  such  a degree  that 
they  would  fall  to  the  state.  The  International 
was  approved  of  to  suit  the  views  of  the  majority 
in  the  party ; but  it  was  not  altogether  safe  to  de- 
clare the  new  association  a branch  of  it,  and  hence 
the  qualifying  clause,  as  far  as  the  laws  of  the 
Union  allow.”  An  unqualified  connection  might 
become  dangerous.  The  social  nucleus  of  the 
whole  programme  lies  in  the  declaration  that  the 
party  strives  to  abolish  the  present  method  of  pro- 
duction, and  to  secure  to  the  vrorkmen  the  full 
returns  or  yield  of  their  labor.  If  this  means,  as 
it  seems  to  mean,  that  the  entire  gross  product 
ought  to  go  to  the  laborer,  it  would  be  as  absurd 
and  impossible  when  the  government  should  be- 
come the  sole  capitalist  as  it  would  be  now.  They 
can  hardly  intend  to  say  that  industry  ought  to 
be  co-operative,  and  to  keep  the  entire  returns  of 
labor  as  its  reward,  tlie  laborers  thus  taking  the 
place  of  the  capitalist. 

In  the  Reichstag,  or  Parliament  of  the  North 
German  Confederation,  and,  after  1871,  in  that 
of  United  Germany,  the  two  socialistic  parties 
w^ere  represented  by  a few  of  their  leading  mem- 
bers. By  having  common  enemies  to  contend 
with,  they  were  led  to  overlook  their  less  impor- 
tant differences  and  to  live  in  peace.  The  govern- 


SOCIALISM  IN  GERMANY  SINCE  LASSALLE.  187 


ment  of  Prussia,  also,  by  its  persecution,  first  of 
members  of  the  Workingmen’s  Union  and  then 
of  the  Workingmen’s  Party,  brought  them  nearer 
to  one  another.  Their  differences,  after  the  pas- 
sage of  the  Eisenach  programme,  were  more 
owing  to  differences  of  organization  than  to  dif- 
ferences of  opinion.  At  length  a plan  of  union 
was  agreed  upon  by  the  principal  men  of  the  two 
associations,  and  accepted  at  Gotha,  in  May,  1875, 
by  the  representatives  there  present.  These  repre- 
sented 15,000  paying  members  of  the  Lassalleans, 
or  Workingmen’s  Union,  and  9,000  of  the  others ; 
which  shows  that  the  former,  after  all  their  dis- 
asters, following  the  death  of  Lassalle,  were  still 
the  more  numerous  organization  in  Germany. 
The  acceptance  of  the  Gotha  programme  virtual- 
ly extinguished  the  older  party.  Lassalle  was  de- 
feated, and  the  principles  of  the  International 
were  now  to  be  predominant  in  Germany,  not- 
withstanding its  decline  in  the  rest  of  Europe 
after  the  events  of  1871  in  Paris. 

The  programme  of  Gotha  differs  from  that  of 
Eisenach  not  by  introducing  any  new  principle, 
but  by  being  somewhat  more  positive  and  ex- 
plicit. It  begins  with  declaring  that  ^^worlc  is 
the  source  of  all  wealth  and  all  culture ; and  that, 
as  work  which  is  generally  useful  is  only  possible 
by  means  of  society,  the  entire  product  of  work 
belongs  to  society,  that  is,  to  all  its  members, — « 
with  an  obligation  to  work  common  to  all  accord- 


188  SOCIALISM  IN  GERMANY  SINCE  LASSALLE. 

ing  to  equal  right, — to  every  one  according  to  his 
reasonable  wants.” 

“ In  the  society  of  the  present  the  instruments 
of  work  are  a monopoly  of  the  class  of  capitalists. 
The  dependence  of  the  working  class,  which  is 
due  to  this,  is  the  cause  of  misery  and  servitude 
in  all  its  forms.” 

‘^The  liberation  of  work  requires  that  the 
means  of  production  be  converted  into  the  com- 
mon property  of  society,  and  that  there  be  an 
associational  regulation  of  the  sum  total  of  work, 
with  application  of  its  results  to  the  general  use 
and  a just  distribution  of  its  returns.” 

‘‘  The  liberation  of  work  must  be  effected  by 
the  working  class,  which,  over  against  all  other 
classes,  are  only  a reactionary  mass.” 

“ Proceeding  from  these  principles,  the  Social- 
istic Workingmen’s  Party  of  Germany,  by  all 
legal  means,  strives  for  the  free  state  and  the 
socialistic  society ; for  the  breaking  in  pieces  of 
the  iron  law  of  wages,  hy  doing  away  with  the 
system  of  working  for  wages;  by  putting  an  end 
to  making  gain  out  of  others ; by  the  removal  of 
all  social  and  political  inequality.” 

‘^The  Socialistic  Workingmen’s  Party  of  Ger- 
many, although  directly  acting  within  national 
limits,  is  aware  of  the  international  character  of  the 
workingmen’s  movement,  and  is  resolved  to  fulfil 
all  the  duties  thus  laid  on  workingmen,  in  order 
to  make  the  brotherhood  of  all  men  a reality.” 


SOCIALISM  IN  GERMANY  SINCE  LASSALLE.  189 


Then  it  is  added,  for  the  purpose  of  pleasing 
Lassalle’s  followers,  that,  ‘4n  order  to  pave  the 
way  to  a solution  of  the  social  question,”  the 
party  demands  the  setting  up  of  socialistic  pro- 
ductive associations,  to  be  assisted  by  the  states 
and  under  the  democratic  control  of  the  working 
people.”  These  associations  are  to  be  called  into 
life  for  [manufacturing]  industry  and  for  agricul- 
ture to  such  an  extent  that  out  of  them  the  social- 
istic organization  of  the  sum  total  of  work  may 
arise. 

The  programme  then  sets  foi-th  certain  points 
as  foundations  of  the  state,  and  makes  certain 
demands  for  reform  within  the  existing  order  of 
the  state,  which  are  not  materially  different  from 
those  of  the  Eisenach  programme. 

The  first  paragraph  of  the  declaration  made  at 
Gotha  is  open  to  more  than  one  objection.  Meh- 
ring,  in  his  Deutsche  Socialdemocratie,”  criti- 
cises the  expression,  to  every  one  according  to 
his  reasonable  wants.”  What  does  this  vague 
phrase  mean,  and  who  is  to  be  judge  in  the  case  ? 
So  of  righteous  division  of  the  proceeds  of  labor 
he  says  that  this  is  what  every  society  wdiicli  has 
life  in  it  regards  as  its  duty.  He  adds  that  ^^an 
authentic  interpretation  of  the  canon  of  the  party 
was  represented  as  to  be  expected,”  which,  how- 
ever, until  now  (1877)  has  not  seen  the  light. 
“ After  a careful  study  of  their  literature,  one  can 
only  say  that  the  leaders  of  the  movement  have 


190  SOCIALISM  IN  GERMANY  SINCE  LASSALLE. 

decidedly  different  views  respecting  the  meaning 
and  comprehensiveness  of  the  party  programme.” 

The  very  beginning  of  the  programme  seems  to 
be  altogether  illogical  and  inconsequent.  Work 
is  the  source  of  all  riches  and  culture.  Work, 
having  a general  value,  is  only  possible  in  and 
through  society.  Therefore,  the  sum  total  of 
work  belongs  to  society — that  is,  to  all  its  mem- 
bers.” Such  are  the  fundamental  propositions. 
But  is  it  not  possible  to  conceive  of  an  individual 
ill  a society  making  something  that  everybodj^ 
else  will  be  glad  to  have — a chair,  for  instance — 
v/ithout  its  belonging  to  society  ? If  so,  does  not 
the  proposition  beg  the  question  that  there  is  no 
such  thing  as  private  property  ? 

Even  before  the  meeting  at  Gotha,  where  these 
articles  were  accepted,  the  socialistic  movement 
began  to  make  steady  progress.  At  least,  the 
increase  of  votes  given  to  the  candidates  of  this 
party  for  seats  in  the  Reichstag  can  be  interpreted 
on  no  other  supposition.  In  the  first  Reichstag 
after  the  formation  of  the  German  Empire  there 
were  but  two  socialist  members.  In  the  second 
(1874)  there  were  nine,  for  whom  339,738  votes 
were  cast.  Yon  Treitschke  estimates  that  the 
whole  strength  of  the  party  or  factions,  counting 
men,  and  youths  too  young  to  vote,  may  have 
then  been  about  a million.  The  vote  of  1877, 
when  a new  parliament  ivas  chosen,  amounted, 
according  to  Mr.  Bancroft  Davis  (in  his  correspon- 


SOCIALISM  IN  GERMANY  SINCE  LASSALLE.  191 


dence  with  the  Department  of  State)  to  from  six 
to  eight  hundred  thousand.  Decent  evidences  of 
political  fanaticism,  leading  to  the  greatest  crimes, 
may  retard  this  progress  for  a time ; but  it  does 
not  yet  seem  to  have  reached  the  highest  flood 
tide.  It  is,  however,  quite  probable  that  many 
vote  for  representatives  of  socialism  who  know 
little  about  its  principles,  either  out  of  hatred  to 
Prussia  or  for  some  other  extraneous  cause.  The 
party  at  present  has  no  concentrated  strength ; 
but  consists  chiefly  of  a large  number  of  minor- 
ities and  of  a few  masses  which  control  their  elec- 
tion districts. 

The  zeal  of  the  German  socialists  in  their  cause 
is  shown  by  two  facts : one  of  which  is  that  more 
than  a hundred  and  flfty  agitators — trained  and 
schooled,  and  either  drawing  a full  or  partial 
salary  for  their  services  or  working  out  of  love  to 
the  cause, — can  be  said  to  be  in  the  employment 
of  the  Workingmen’s  Party.  The  other  fact  is 
their  activity  in  spreading  their  doctrine  through 
the  press.  The  central  organ  has  12,000  sub- 
scribers. Besides  this,  they  have  forty-one  polit- 
ical sheets,  one  literary  paper  with  a socialistic 
tone,  and  fourteen  organs  of  trades  - unions. 
Twenty-eight  are  printed  by  presses  which  social- 
ists have  founded,  of  which  fourteen  exist  at 
present  (Mehring). 

Another  sign  of  the  growth  of  the  Social  Dem- 
ocratic Party  is  the  fact  that  a number  of  profes- 


192  SOCIALISM  IN  GERMANY  SINCE  LASSALLE. 

sors  in  the  universities  who  lecture  on  political 
economy — although  they  have  not  joined  its  ranks, 
and  in  some  instances,  at  least,  reject  its  leading 
doctrines — give  to  it  in  a certain  sense  the  hand  of 
fellowship.  They  go  by  the  name  of  Katheder- 
socialisten  (or  socialists  in  the  professor’s  chair), 
and  have  formed  a union  at  Eisenach  for  social 
politics.”  Among  them  are  names  well  known 
to  students  in  their  science.  Mehring  (in  his 
‘^Social  Democracy”)  includes  among  them,  as 
belonging  to  a school  with  leanings  toward  social- 
ism in  the  widest  sense,  Brentano,  Scheel,  Schmol- 
ler,  Adolf  Wagner;  in  a narrower  sense,  Rodber- 
tus,  Schaeffle,  F.  A.  Lange,  and  Diihring.  This 
scientific  socialism,”  he  adds,  distinguishes  itself 
by  an  uncommon  number  of  interesting  charac- 
ters ; but  this  advantage  has  a reverse  side,  in  an 
entire  want  of  agreement  both  as  to  their  criti- 
cism of  the  present  order  of  society  and  as  to  their 
positive  demands.  They  have  not  made  any 
lasting  impression  on  the  workingmen’s  move- 
ment. But  it  is  scientific  socialism  which  to-day 
fills  all  patriotic  hearts  with  anxiety.” 

One  of  these  learned  men  has  written  a little 
work,  entitled  the  Quintessence  of  Socialism,” 
of  which  I propose  to  speak  in  the  next  chapter. 


MILL  ON  SOCIALISM. 


193 


APPENDIX 

on  Mr.  J.  S.  Mill’s  chapters  on  socialism,  writ- 
ten in  1869,  and  published  in  the  present  year, 
1879,  in  the  Fortnightly  Review. 

When  Mr.  Mill  wrote  the  chapter  on  property, 
in  his  Political  Economy,  of  which  two  sections 
are  devoted  to  Communism  and  to  St.  Simon- 
ism  and  Fourierism,  the  problems  touching  labor 
and  capital  had  only  begun  to  be  politically  and 
socially  important.  In  1869  he  formed  a design 
of  writing  a book  on  the  great  social  question, 
which  was  now  showing  the  hold  it  was  taking 
on  the  minds  of  philosophers  and  workingmen  in 
various  ways,  especially  by  the  progress  of  the 
International.  Of  this  book  only  four  chapters  in 
their  first  rough  drafts  ” seem  to  have  been  com- 
posed. I give  a very  brief  sketch  of  them  here, 
the  present  work  having  already  been  written 
when  they  were  first  printed. 

Mr.  Mill,  after  noticing  the  demands  of  work- 
ingmen in  Great  Britain,  such  as  that  wages 
should  not  depend  on  free  contract,  that  “ usury  ” 
should  be  abolished,  and  that  land  should  not  be 
private  property,  passes  on  to  speak  very  briefly 
of  the  position  taken  by  the  same  class  on  the 
Continent — a position  which  has  been  sufficiently 
explained  in  the  text  of  this  work.  The  great 
evils,  of  which  socialists  complain,  are  poverty, 
9 


194 


MILL  ON  SOCIALISM. 


“little  connected  with  individual  deserts,”  and 
competition.  To  competition  of  laborers,  low 
wages  are  due ; to  competition  among  producers, 
ruin  and  bankruptcy.  Both  these  evils  tend  to  in- 
crease with  the  increase  of  population  ; and  none 
are  benefited  but  landholders,  capitalists,  and  re- 
ceivers of  fixed  money  incomes.  Wealth  enables 
its  owners  to  undersell  all  other  producers,  and  to 
engross  the  labor  of  a country,  subjecting  the 
workmen  to  such  terms  of  payment  for  labor  as 
the  employers  offer.  Mr.  Mill  fortifies  his  asser- 
tions regarding  the  attacks  of  the  socialists  on  the 
existing  order  of  things  by  extensive  quotations 
from  Yictor  Considerant,  the  Fourierite,  Robert 
Owen,  and  Louis  Blanc. 

He  next  examines  the  socialist  objections  to 
the  present  order  of  society  ; one  of  which  is 
that  wages  are  low,  and  tend  to  fall  still  more. 
This  assertion,  he  says,  “is  in  opposition  to  all 
accurate  information  and  to  many  notorious  facts. 
It  has  yet  to  be  proved  that  there  is  any  country 
of  the  civilized  world,  where  the  ordinary  wages 
of  labor,  estimated  either  in  money  or  in  articles 
of  consumption,  are  declining;  while  in  many 
they  are,  upon  the  whole,  on  the  increase — an  in- 
crease which  is  becoming  not  slower  but  more 
rapid.  The  exceptions  are  temporary  and  con- 
fined to  certain  branches  of  industry  which  are 
becoming  superseded  by  others.” 

The  socialists,  especially  M.  Louis  Blanc,  Mr. 


MILL  ON  SOCIALISM. 


195 


Mill  goes  on  to  say,  seem  to  have  fallen  into  the 
error,  which  Malthus  at  first  committed,  ^‘o£ 
supposing  that,  because  population  has  a greater 
power  of  increase  than  subsistence,  its  pressure 
upon  subsistence  must  be  always  groivmg  more 
severed  The  tendency  to  over-population  is  a 
fact  which  communism,  as  well  as  the  existing  order 
of  society,  would  have  to  deal  with.”  Experi- 
ence shows  that  in  the  existing  state  of  society 
the  pressure  of  population  on  subsistence,  which 
is  the  principal  cause  of  low  wages,  though  a 
great,  is  not  an  increasing  evil.”  And  the  prog- 
ress of  civilization  has  a tendency  to  diminish 
it  by  a more  rapid  increase  of  the  means  of  em- 
ploying labor,  by  opening  new  countries  to  labor- 
ers, and  by  improving  the  intelligence  and  pru- 
dence of  a people.  It  is,  however,  of  course  an 
open  question  what  form  of  society  has  the  great- 
est power  of  dealing  successfully  with  the  pres- 
sure of  population  on  subsistence. 

Mr.  Mill  next  remarks  that  even  the  most  en- 
lightened socialists  have  an  imperfect  and  one- 
sided  notion  of  the  workings  of  competition. 

They  forget  that  it  is  the  cause  of  high  as  well 
as  of  low  prices  and  values  ; ” the  buyers  of  labor 
and  of  commodities  compete  with  one  another,  as 
well  as  the  sellers.  When  it  is  perfectly  free  on 
both  sides,  its  tendency  is  to  equalize,  not  to  raise 
or  lower,  the  prices  of  articles ; to  level  inequali- 
ties of  remuneration,  and  to  reduce  all  to  a gen- 


196 


MILL  ON  SOCIALISM. 


eral  average.  And,  particularly,  if  it  keeps  down 
tlie  price  of  articles  on  which  wages  are  expend- 
ed, this  is  to  the  great  advantage  of  those  who 
depend  on  wages  [when  they  are  considered  sim- 
ply as  consumers].  Mr.  Louis  Blanc,  and  other 
socialists,  affirm  that  low  prices  produced  by 
competition  are  delusive,  as  leading  to  higher 
prices  than  before,  and  finally  to  the  command 
of  the  market  by  the  richest  competitor.  But 
the  commonest  experience,  says  Mr.  Mill,  shows 
that  this  state  of  things  is  wholly  imaginary. 
'No  “ important  branch  of  industry  or  commerce, 
formerly  divided  among  many,  has  become,  or 
shows  any  tendency  to  become,  the  monopoly  of 
a few.”  [But  do  not  many  smaller  branches 
show  it,  and  might  not  a combination  of  the 
strongest  in  important  branches  break  down  the 
rest  ?]  Great  joint-stock  companies  can  keep  up 
prices,  and  some  businesses  pass  out  of  the  hands 
of  smaller  producers  into  fewer  large  ones ; but 
wffien  they  do  this,  prices  are  lowered  by  the  sav- 
ing of  cost.” 

Competition,  however,  if  a security  for  lower 
prices,  is  by  no  means  a security  for  quality.  On 
this  point  socialists  have  made  out  the  existence 
of  a great  and  growing  evil.  This  evil  Mr.  Mill 
thinks  to  be  capable  of  cure  by  laws  against 
frauds  of  adulteration,  and  by  cooperative  pur- 
chase from  the  wholesale  merchants. 

Another  misapprehension  of  socialists  relates 


MILL  ON  SOCIALISM. 


197 


to  the  share  of  the  product  taken  by  others  be- 
sides those  who  are  directly  engaged  in  the  labor 
of  production.  ‘‘  As  long  as  a man  derives  an  in- 
come from  his  capital,  he  has  not  the  option  of 
withholding  it  from  the  use  of  others.”  This  in- 
come from  capital  is  measured  by  interest,  and  in- 
terest apart  from  risk  is  in  England  about  three 
and  a third  per  cent.  If  a man  were  to  give  up 
the  whole  of  this  to  his  laborers,  who  already 
share  among  them  the  whole  of  his  capital,  as 
it  is  annually  reproduced,  the  addition  to  their 
weekly  wages  would  be  inconsiderable.  Of  what 
he  obtains  beyond  three  per  cent  ” [Mr.  Mill  takes 
off  one-third  of  one  per  cent,  for  risk],  ^^a  great 
part  is  insurance  against  the  manifold  losses  to 
which  he  is  exposed,  and  cannot  be  safely  applied 
to  his  own  use,  but  requires  to  be  kept  in  reserve  to 
cover  those  losses,  when  they  recur.  The  remain- 
der is  properly  the  remuneration  of  his  skill  and 
industry — the  wages  of  his  labor  of  superinten- 
dence.” 

“ The  present  system,”  Mr.  Mill  continues,  is 
not,  as  many  socialists  believe,  hurrying  us  into  a 
state  of  general  indigence  and  slavery ; on  the 
contrary,  the  general  tendency  is  toward  the  slow 
diminution  ” of  existing  evils. 

The  author  next  passes  on  to  the  subject  of  the 
difficulties  of  socialism,  making  the  natural  dis- 
tinction between  small  communistic  societies 
(distributed  over  an  entire  country,  if  the  system 


198 


]MILL  ON  SOCIALISM. 


slioiild  succeed),  and  the  management  of  the 
whole  productive  industry  of  a state  by  the  gen- 
eral government.  The  second  (which  is  now  the 
only  plan  of  socializing  society  that  is  advocated) 
has,  he  thinks,  all  the  difficulties  which  attend  on 
the  first  and  many  more.  The  first  has  the  ad- 
vantage that  it  can  be  brought  into  operation  by 
degrees.  The  second,  which  must  resort  to  force 
if  necessary,  requires  in  those  who  would  support 
it  both  a serene  confidence  in  their  own  wisdom 
and  a recklessness  of  other  people’s  sufferings, 
which  Robespierre  and  St.  Just  scarcely  came  up 
to.”  Yet  ‘‘it  has  great  elements  of  popularity 
which  the  more  cautious  form  of  socialism  has 
not,  because  what  it  professes  to  do  it  promises  to 
do  quickly.”  Mr.  Mill  next  considers  the  motives 
to  exertion  which  would  naturally  exist  in  both 
these  forms  of  socialistic  life,  and  comes  to  the 
conclusion  that  they  have  no  advantage,  as  far  as 
the  general  body  is  concer/ied,  while  as  respects 
the  managing  heads  it  is  placed  at  a considerable 
disadvantage.  [It  is  implied  in  this  conclusion 
that  the  manager  is  chosen  by  the  community, 
that  he  receives  no  especial  remuneration  above 
others,  and  that  all  work  has  the  same  wages.  As 
these  conditions  need  not  exist  in  small,  volun- 
tary communities,  like  those  which  have  been 
considered  in  our  second  chapter,  and  as  the  very 
contrast  to,  and  separation  from  the  outside 
world,  which  such  societies  present,  may  be  a 


MILL  ON  SOCIALISM. 


199 


motive  of  some  power,  liis  remarks  do  not  fully 
apply  to  this  kind  of  communities.  Nor,  again,  do 
they  necessarily  apply  to  socialistic  states,  where 
the  central  power  might,  and  probably  would,  ap- 
point all  the  managers  and  agents  engaged  in  pro- 
duction and  distribution.  These  would  thus  be 
government  officers,  naturally  under  the  supervi- 
sion of  higher  authorities,  and  able  to  supervise 
the  workingmen.]  The  motives,  however,  under 
communism,  as  Mr.  Mill  urges,  in  doing  honest 
and  efficient  work,  would  be  no  stronger  than 
those  which  now  act  on  laborers  ; and  the  principle 
of  paying  all  workers  and  kinds  of  work  alike, 
which  seems  to  be  necessary  in  socialistic  produc- 
tion, may  be  in  part  superseded  under  the  pres- 
ent form  of  industry  [as  by  piece-work,  by  dis- 
missing, or  rewarding,  on  a lower  scale,  the  lazy 
or  incompetent,  by  special  rewards,  like  that  of 
admitting  the  faithful  or  skilful  to  a share  of  the 
profits] . 

Another  just  criticism  of  the  author  is,  that  as 
private  life  in  communistic  associations  would  be 
brought  in  a most  unexampled  degree  under  the 
dominion  of  public  authority,  there  would  be  less 
scope  for  the  development  of  individual  character 
and  individual  preferences,  than  has  hitherto  ex- 
isted among  the  full  citizens  of  afiy  state,  belong- 
ing to  the  progressive  branches  of  the  human 
family. 

Yet  Mr.  Mill  does  ^^not  seek  to  draw  any  in- 


200 


MILL  ON  SOCIALISM. 


ference  against  the  possibility  that  communistic 
production  is  capable,  at  some  future  time,  of  be- 
ing the  form  of  society  best  adapted  to  the  wants 
and  circumstances  of  mankind.”  “ The  various 
schemes  for  managing  the  productive  resources 
of  the  country  by  public,  instead  of  private 
agency  have  a case  for  trial,  and  some  of  them 
may  eventually  establish  their  claims  to  prefer- 
ence over  the  existing  order  of  things ; but  they 
are  at  present  workable  only  by  the  elite  of  man- 
kind, and  have  yet  to  prove  their  power  of  train- 
ing mankind  at  large  to  the  state  of  improve- 
ment which  they  presuppose.”  [If  they  should 
turn  out  to  establish  their  claims  by  and  by,  the 
utilitarian  school  of  philosophers  would  find  no 
difficulty  in  sacrificing  the  institution  of  prop- 
erty to  the  new  Leviathan.] 


SCHAEFFLe’s  QUINTESSENCE  OF  SOCIALISM.”  201 


CHAPTER  VI. 

I. 

schaepfle’s  “quintessence  op  socialism.” 

This  short  work  of  69  pages  aims  to  give 
a condensed  account  of  wliat  modern,  especially 
German,  socialism  is  in  its  leading  principles,  and 
of  its  consequences  in  a politico-economical  re- 
spect. The  author,  who  is  an  able  and  leading 
political  economist  of  Southwestern  Germany, 
shows  a dispassionate,  impartial  spirit ; although 
one  cannot  help  getting  the  impression  that  he  is 
not  decidedly  averse  to  the  movement  which  he 
describes.  In  the  preface  to  his  second  edition 
he  expresses  the  opinion  that  the  wealthy  and 
cultivated  classes  are,  at  least,  as  much  interested 
in  the  thorough  improvement  of  the  politico-eco- 
nomical organization  of  society  as  the  proleta- 
rians are ; ” and  that  in  the  restless,  feverish  strug- 
gles and  uncertain  issues  of  modern  industrial  ac- 
quisitiveness “families  of  wealth  are  not  sure 
whether  they  may  not,  in  the  next  or  in  the  third 
generation,  themselves  sink  to  the  proletarian 
condition.  They  especially  are  threatened  in 
9* 


202  schaeffle’s  quintessence  of  socialism.” 

their  estates  and  family  life  by  the  existing  state 
of  things.” 

Sounding  thus  a note  of  alarm,  as  if  he  would 
open  the  eyes  of  all  to  a new  order  of  society  in 
prospect,  or,  at  least,  possible,  he  asks,  as  his  first 
question,  what  socialism  is,  and  defines  it  as  the 
substitution  of  collective  ” capital  for  private 
capital ; that  is,  of  the  collective  property  of  the 
community  in  the  means  of  production.  The  col- 
lective organization  of  national  work  would  set 
aside  all  concurrence,  all  competition,  by  putting 
the  production  and  the  distribution  of  all  pro- 
ducts under  official  direction,  either  immediately 
or  indirectly  under  the  control  of  the  state. 

For  this  end  the  sum  of  the  needed  supplies  of 
every  product  must  be  fixed  by  a current  official 
estimate  of  the  required  necessaries,  made  by 
authorities  having  to  do  with  the  production  and 
disposal  of  commodities  ; and  such  data  must  lie 
at  the  foundation  of  the  social  plan  of  industry. 
The  occasional  deficiencies  or  excesses  of  objects 
produced,  as  compared  with  the  w^ants  or  de- 
mands of  every  period,  would  need  to  be  periodi- 
cally balanced  by  means  of  supplies  laid  up  in 
public  storehouses. 

It  is  plain  that  some  such  starting-point  is  ne- 
cessary in  the  system.  But  it  is  not  equally  plain 
that  to  meet  wants  in  this  way  would  be  as  effi- 
cient as  the  present  plan,  that  of  acting  through 
the  energy  of  individual  persons  and  through  pri- 


sciiaeffle’s  ‘‘quintessence  of  socialism.”  203 

vate,  separate  capital.  Those  who  are  familiar 
with  Whately’s  beautiful  discussion, — in  which  the 
supplies  of  the  wants  of  London,  through  a series 
of  public  officers,  are  compared  with  similar  sup- 
plies through  private  dealers,  each  having  his 
own  beat  and  being  familiar  with  its  necessities, — 
will  doubt  whether  free  individual  interest  v/ould 
not  do  the  work  which  it  does  now,  better  than 
combined  and,  to  a degree,  enforced  work.  So 
that,  unless  the  evils  of  the  present  system  at 
some  other  point  do  not  greatly  overbalance  its 
benefits,  we  must  start  with  the  impression  that 
German  socialism  would  from  the  first  have  a 
load  greater  than  it  could  carry. 

On  this  plan  in  all  operations  of  business,  and, 
indeed,  in  all  operations,  the  state,  and  the  state 
alone,  produces  whatever  is  produced,  and  ■ pro- 
vides, in  the  system  of  production,  for  a supply 
of  whatever  is  consumed.  A departure  this  the 
widest  possible  from  the  present  system  of  pri- 
vate work  and  private  capital.  “The  reader,” 
says  Mr.  Schaeffle,  “who  has  never  concerned 
himself  particularly  with  this  revolutionary  plan 
of  organization,  will  scarcely  comprehend  it. 
We  ourselves  have  spent  years  in  getting  to  the 
bottom  of  it.  And  yet  this  plan  has  already  a party 
on  its  side,  which,  owing  to  its  hot  zeal,  its  enthu- 
siasm and  a faith  that  removes  mountains,  to  its 
compact  organization  and  international  diffusion, 
takes  the  lead  of  many  other  great  parties,  con- 


204  sciiaeffle’s  quintecsence  of  socialism.” 

stantly  gains  proselytes,  and  looks  with  the  assur- 
ance of  victory  toward  the  future.”  It  is,  in- 
deed, true  that  the  leaders  among  the  German 
socialists  are  perfectly  aware  that  the  agitation 
for  tlie  new  collective  order  of  things  is  in  its  be- 
ginnings ; that  the  present  system  of  production 
must  root  out  small  proprietors,  and  well-nigh 
complete  the  plutocratic  process  of  separating  the 
people  into  a proletarian  multitude  and  a few 
over-grown  millionaires,  before  the  masses,  espe- 
cially the  country  population  and  the  small  citi- 
zens, will  or  can  assent  to  the  piinciple  of  ^col- 
lectivism.’ At  such  an  early  stage  of  the  prog- 
ress of  a movement  reserve  in  making  known  a 
positive  programme  is  not  at  all  striking.  All 
prudent  leaders  of  parties  have,  at  a like  stage  of 
their  agitation,  done  the  same.” 

This  caution,  we  may  remark,  is  obviously 
necessary,  for  a detailed  plan  might  contain  par- 
ticulars  which  would  make  its  execution  impossi- 
ble or  vastly  enhance  its  difficulties.  But,  on  the 
other  hand,  if  society  is  to  be  overturned  from  its 
foundations,  men  will  insist  on  seeing  that  utter 
ruin  does  not  stare  them  in  the  face ; that  a new 
^ order  of  things  is  practicable ; that  it  involves 
far  fewer  evils  than  those  which  cling  to  the  so- 
ciety of  the  present.  To  form  such  judgments, 
they  must  know  more  than  that  certain  philoso- 
phers or  partisans  think  that  all  will  go  right  in 
the  future. 


SCIIAEFFLe’s  QUINTESSENCE  OF  SOCIALISM.”  205 

Although  the  socialists  forbear  to  go  into  par- 
ticulars which  do  not  flow  out  of  their  original 
and  essential  idea,  they  claim  that  time  is  work- 
ing with  them  in  their  movements.  The  days 
when  the  workman  was  the  proprietor  of  his  ma- 
chines and  products,  the  days  of  home-work  and 
cotton-looms,  have  given  way  to  vast  engines  and 
vast  manufactories ; but  the  laborers,  crowded  in 
enormous  establishments,  are  schooled  and  con- 
centrated as  a politico-social  force.  And  so,  al- 
though the  state’s  concentration  of  work,  by  the 
mechanism  of  general  military  service,  is  not  ap- 
proved of  by  the  leaders  of  proletariat ; it  is 
not  looked  upon  as  an  obstacle  in  their  way. 
The  army  serves  as  a school,  which  in  the  long 
run  is  far  from  being  dangerous  to  socialism, 
which  drills  its  soldiers  of  the  future,  while  it 
makes  the  nations  hostile  on  flnancial  accounts  to 
their  rulers.  Everything  that  measures  off  the 
masses  as  a separate  whole,  that  includes  in  itself 
a public  union  of  individual  forces  on  a vast  scale, 
has  a close  resemblance,  in  one  respect,  at  least, 
to  socialism.  Thus  bayonets  and  centralization 
are  not  safe  reliances  for  existing  social  order, 
since  socialism  may  be  forced  to  use  them,  and 
can  use  them  most  effectively,  for  its  own  politi- 
cal purposes. 

The  Alpha  and  Omega  of  socialism  is  the 
transmutation  of  private  competing  capital  into 
united  collective  capital.”  In  regard  to  the  time 


200  schaeffle’s  quintessence  of  socialism.” 

Vv  lien  tills  great  change  will  be  effected  the  leaders 
of  the  socialists  entertain  no  sanguine  hopes.  The 
means  used  in  the  hope  of  effecting  it  are  obvious 
enough.  Some  of  them,  such  as  the  spread  of 
productive  associations,  are  not  in  reality  con- 
formed to  the  social  theory,  but  find  their  object 
in  bringing  the  operatives  together.  Others  are 
methods  of  agitation,  derived  from  the  theories 
of  Marx  in  regard  to  capital  and  surplus  value. 
Mr.  Schaeffle  takes  pains  to  show  that,  when  this 
agitation  reaches  even  the  charge  of  theft  made 
against  capital  itself,  it  is  not  intended  to  apply 
to  individual  undertakers  or  capitalists,  but  to  the 
system  • while  the  private  owner  of  a manufac- 
tory, for  instance,  may  be  admitted  to  be  a very 
estimable  citizen.  This  is  no  doubt  true ; but  is 
it  not  true,  also,  that  the  agitators  have  purposely 
excited  a hostility  in  the  minds  of  the  working- 
class  against  the  emploj-ers?  And  so,  if  ever 
socialism  should  venture  on  its  last  step,  that  step 
will  be  the  more  sure  to  be  a violent  one,  the  fur- 
ther the  social  demagogues  depart  from  the  spirit 
of  conciliation  and  sober  argument. 

Socialists  do  not  regard  as  doubtful  the  final 
conversion  of  private  into  collective  capital,  nor 
does  the  uncommon  difficulty  of  the  transition  to 
the  new  order  of  things  give  them  much  anxiety. 
For  they  reckon  on  the  vast  multitude  of  the  ^ ex- 
propriated,’ as  contrasted  with  the  few  ‘ expro- 
priators ; ’ on  the  considerations  that  the  process 


sciiaeffle’s  ‘^quintessence  of  sccialism.”  207 

of  destruction  of  the  middle  class  will  at  length 
be  complete,  and  that  the  continuance  of  private 
production  by  the  help  of  workingmen,  thorough- 
ly discontented  and  devoid  of  all  faith  in  author- 
ity, must  at  length  cease.” 

The  questions  of  right  on  the  part  of  the  capi- 
talist, and  of  compensation  when  he  shall  liave 
come  to  the  end  of  his  power  of  private  produc- 
tion, are  next  considered.  The  socialists  say 
something  like  this : “ The  ‘ Jjourgeois  ’ may  have 
a right  to  that  wdiich  he  lias  earned  under  the 
present  system  of  production,  and  we  can  let 
him  have  a compensation  for  his  private  capital, 
just  as  he  paid  oif  the  feudal  rights.”  “ Social- 
ism is  not  disinclined  to  grant  damages  to  the 
present  class  of  private  owners  of  property,  if 
they  good-naturedly  allow  themselves  to  be  ex- 
propriated ; but  the  kind  of  expropriation  must 
be  such  as  will  be  consistent  with  the  principles  of 
the  social  state.”  They  could  not  receive  tlie 
rents  of  former  property  ; but  might  be  paid  “ in 
means  of  enjoyment”  even  to  the  full  money 
value  of  their  possessions.  “It  is  easily  con- 
ceived,” says  our  author,  “ that  in  this  method  of 
compensation  the  gigantic  capital  of  the  Roths- 
childs and  their  compeers,  even  when  the  fullest 
payment  should  be  made  to  them,  could  pass 
over  into  a stifling  abundance  of  means  of  enjoy- 
ment. Such  vast  possessions  could  continue  with 
them  only  for  a time.  Private  capital,  however 


208  schaeffle’s  “ quintessence  of  socialism.” 

large,  would  necessarily  be  set  aside  and  termi- 
nate at  once  as  capital,  and  ere  long  as  property ; for 
j)erj)etual  rents,  paid  even  in  tlie  shape  of  orders 
for  means  of  enjoyment,  would  by  no  means,  on 
grounds  of  principle,  be  granted  by  the  socialis- 
tic state.”  We  apprehend,  hovv'ever,  that  things 
would  not  come  to  such  a pass  as  is  here  contem- 
plated. In  the  first  the  property  of  the 

upper  class,  if  they  were  unwilling  to  give  up 
their  rights  and  should  try  the  fortunes  of  war 
unsuccessfully,  would  be  confiscated  at  the  end  of 
the  struggle.  In  the  second  place,  if  the  new 
state  should  agree  to  a compensation  at  all  ade- 
quate to  the  claims,  it  would  not  be  paid.  The 
notion  of  a satisfaction  or  even  of  partial  amends 
seems  well-nigh  chimerical,  especially  at  the  point 
of  time  when  a new  government,  wholly  inex- 
perienced, would  be  at  the  beginning  of  a wholly 
new  experiment  in  the  history  of  the  world. 

The  social  state  being  conceived  of  as  estab- 
lished, and  having  all  production,  transportation, 
and  furnishing  of  supplies  in  its  hands  ; it  would 
seem  plain  that  not  much  choice  would  be  left 
to  pi-ivate  persons,  in  reference  to  articles  they 
would  wish  to  use,  and  to  the  satisfaction  of  their 
desires.  The  state  makes,  brings,  and  offers  at 
its  storehouse,  in  exchange  for  certificates  of 
liours’  work,  everything  which  is  placed  within 
the  reach  of  individuals,  and  has  no  competitor 
in  these  functions.  Will  human  beings,  who  are 


sghaeffle’s  quintessence  of  socialism.”  209 

all  of  them  agents  of  the  state  or  workmen  of 
the  state,  be  content  with  such  a bill  of  fare  for 
life  as  the  state  sees  fit  to  set  before  them ; and 
is  not  such  a scheme  of  society  a destruction  of  a 
very  large  part  of  individual  liberty  ? Schaeffle 
admits  the  force  of  this  objection,  and  adds  that 
socialism  itself  has  done  its  best  to  repel  men 
from  itself  ” at  this  very  point.  Many  of  its  ad- 
herents have  promised  to  the  proletariat  a half 
royal  collective  luxury  of  public  feasts,  of  enjoy- 
ments from  art  and  the  like ; but  have  left  over 
to  private  housekeeping  and  the  personal  free- 
dom of  procuring  supplies  scarcely  a square  foot 
of  liberty,  scarcely  an  inch  of  domestic  comfort 
and  an  agreeable  home.” 

Our  author,  however,  maintains  that  collective 
production  can  have  its  statistics  of  recurring  in- 
dividual and  family  wants,  and  can  provide  for 
these  wants  as  effectively  as  is  now  done  in  the 
open  market  under  the  sway  of  demand  and  sup- 
ply. He  sees  no  reason  why,  on  the  system  of 
social  production,  individual  wants  and  requisi- 
tions may  not  meet  with  due  attention.  If  so- 
cialism were  to  do  away  with  this  power  of 
satisfying  personal  wants,  it  would  deserve  to  be 
looked  on  as  the  deadly  foe  of  all  freedom,  of  all 
civilization,  of  all  material  and  intellectual  well- 
being. The  one  practical  principle  of  all  freedom 
— to  be  able  to  spend  one’s  own  incomes  according 
to  his  pleasure — would  alone  be  too  valuable  to 


210  schaeffle’s  ^^quintessence  of  socialism.” 

be  parted  with  for  all  the  advantages  of  social 
reform.  The  first  understanding  with  socialistn 
must  be  made  on  this  very  ground.”  We  thank 
our  author  for  these  expressions  of  his  opinions. 
The  programme  of  living  is  made  by  the  socialist 
not  for  the  really  free,  but  for  those  whom  they 
agitate.  Those  who  have  been  used  to  better 
things  and  to  free  choices  of  their  own  are  not 
taken  into  account. 

If  production  and  the  supply  of  wants  through 
a nation  can  be  put  into  the  hands  of  the  state,  it 
is  easier  still  to  conceive  of  the  means  of  commu- 
nication as  being  managed  by  the  state  alone. 
To  a great  extent  the  post,  the  telegraph,  and  the 
railroad  are  under  public  control  already,  in  ad- 
vance of  the  socialistic  state,  and  no  essentially 
new  arrangements  would  need  to  be  made  in  this 
department  of  work. 

In  respect  to  production,  the  principal  depart- 
ment of  work,  Schaefile  remarks  that  a stop  needs 
not  to  be  put,  all  at  once,  to  private  operations. 
One  branch  after  another  can  be  converted  into 
the  new  form  of  industry.  Nor  will  it  be  essen- 
tial that  every  kind  of  production  should  ever  be 
I’equired  to  conform  rigorously  to  the  theory. 
Production  for  one’s  own  support,  without  sale  to 
others,  would  be  one  of  tliese  exceptions.  Pro- 
duction which  consists  in  personal  services,  like 
that  of  the  physician  or  the  artist,  would  be 
another.  In  such  cases  concurrence  or  competi- 


schaeffle’s  "‘quintessence  of  socialism.”  211 

tion,  the  great  bugbear  of  socialism,  might  be  en- 
dured ; and  the  service  would  be  remunerated  by 
the  tickets  of  work  obtained  by  the  workman  for 
his  labor  and  handed  over  to  his  personal  helper. 
Those  personal  services,  however,  which  need  a 
considerable  capital,  would  be  regarded  as  public 
offices  and  be  paid  publicly,  whether  offices  of 
the  state,  the  commune,  or  the  school. 

A radical  consideration  in  all  production  is  the 
cost ; and  here  the  socialists  claim  that  in  their 
system,  where  every  one  is  interested  in  the  effi- 
ciency of  every  other,  costs  will  be  likely  to  be 
less,  and,  therefore,  the  dividend  to  each  work- 
man greater,  than  in  the  present  system  of  work 
and  wages.  Our  author  doubts  whether  socialis- 
tic labor  will,  of  course,  have  this  advantage  ; 
but  expresses  no  very  positive  opinion.  To  us  it 
appears  as  if  an  unknown  quantity  enters  into 
the  question.  Everything  depends  on  the  influ- 
ence of  the  new  conditions  of  work  and  on  the  new 
causes  in  general  acting  upon  the  character  of 
the  workmen  themselves.  Will  they  be  made 
manly,  self-relying,  conscientious,  and  provident, 
or  the  opposite  of  all  this  ? And  within  the  states 
where  capital  and  competition  prevail,  are  there 
not  possible  and  feasible  means  of  raising  up  the 
working  classes  into  something  better  than  their 
present  condition? 

The  principal  question,  however,  is  a broader 
one.  As  Schaeffle  states  it,  it  is  whether  social- 


212  schaeffle’s  ^^quintessence  of  socialism.” 

ism  will  ever  be  in  a condition  to  make  use  of 
that  great  psychological  truth,  in  conformity  with 
which,  under  the  present  laws  of  industry,  pri- 
vate interest  is  made  serviceable  to  production, — 
wliether  on  its  own  ground,  it  can  ever  rival  the 
system  of  private  capital  in  this  respect.  ‘‘We 
liold  this  question  to  be  the  decisive,  although 
until  now  by  no  means  the  decided  point,  on 
which,  in  the  long  run,  everything  depends ; 
from  which  the  victory  or  defeat  of  socialism, 
the  reform  or  destruction  of  civilization,  is  to 
proceed,  as  far  as  causes  can  act  which  are  within 
the  province  of  political  economy.” 

In  considering  this  important  point,  which  has 
less  to  do  with  the  nature  than  with  the  working 
power  of  socialism,  the  author  makes  the  just  re- 
mark that  it  is  not  enough,  in  a million  of  pro- 
ducers, for  any  one  of  them  to  know  that  his  fi- 
nal earnings  depend  on  the  fact  that  the  others 
are  as  industrious  as  he.  This  fails  to  arouse  the 
necessary  self-control.  It  does  not  extinguish 
laziness  and  prevent  the  embezzlement  of  time 
due  to  all  the  rest.  Socialism  is  bound  to  make 
every  single  laborer  as  strongly  interested  in  the 
result,  on  his  own  private  and  separate  account, 
as  he  is  in  the  present  system  of  labor.  Whether 
it  can  succeed  in  this  respect  or  not,  no  one  is 
authorized  to  assert.  The  question  stands  at  the 
door  of  a scientific  discussion.  But  this,  as  the 
author  thinks,  can  be  asserted,  that  at  present  the 


SCHAEFFLe’s  QUrNTESSP:NOE  OF  SOCIALISM.”  213 

programme  of  the  socialists  lacks  practical  clear- 
ness of  thought  touching  the  necessity  of  organ- 
ized concurrence  in  work.  And  yet  there  is  no 
doubt  that,  if  the  competition  of  the  present 
form  of  industry  should  fall  away,  there  would 
be  need  of  emulation  in  work  to  take  its  place.” 
But  how,  we  ask,  could  this  exist  when  every- 
thing goes  by  the  rule  of  the  average  worth  of 
labor  ? 

Our  author  accompanies  these  criticisms  with 
another  which  shows  that  he  as  yet  differs  from 
the  socialists,  as  it  respects  the  theory  of  work, 
on  a most  important  point.  As  long,  says  he,  as 
the  social  theory  takes  into  account,  in  determin- 
*ing  the  value  of  articles,  only  the  social  costs^ 
leaving  out  of  sight  the  value  in  use^  as  affected 
by  place,  time,  etc.,  it  will  be  wholly  incapable  of 
solving  its  o^vn  problem  of  production  by  collec- 
tive capital  in  any  method  which  political  econ- 
omy can  accept.  So  long  as  in  this  sphere  it 
does  not  furnish  something  different  and  more 
positive,  it  can  have  no  outlook  for  the  future. 
Otherwise  in  proposing  to  give  up,  in  favor  of  a 
more  righteous  process  of  distributing  the  results 
of  labor  (the  shady  sides  of  which  cannot  yet  be 
found  out  by  experience),  a form  of  production 
which,  with  its  many  shady  sides,  contains,  to  a 
tolerable  extent,  many-sided  securities,  such  as 
political  economy  demands — in  such  a proposal 
it  can  bring  nothing  to  a practical  issue,  and,  if 


214 


SCHAEFFLe’s  QUINTESSENCE 

determined  to  carry  its  theory  through  by  force, 
it  will  have  but  temporary  success. 

There  remain  a number  of  very  important  re- 
sults of  the  socialist  form  of  industry  and  capi- 
tal, of  which  we  will  speak  in  the  next  section  of 
our  work. 


II. 


SCHAEFFLE’S  “ QUINTESSENCE  OF  SOCIALISM”  CONCLUDED. 


The  principle  of  socialism  opposes  the  continu- 
ance of  private  property  not  only  as  it  respects 
the  direct  means  of  production,  but  also  as  to 
everything  from  which  gains  are  indirectly  ac- 
quired. Thus  it  wages  war  against  all  forms  of 
private  credit,  against  the  whole  system  of  loans, 
against  leasing,  renting,  and  hiring.  Leases  must 
come  to  an  end,  unless  the  state  should  undertake 
that  business,  because  it  has  become,  by  the 
triumph  of  socialism,  the  sole  proprietor  of  land. 
Houses  and  places  of  business  cannot  be  hired, 
rented,  or  sold ; for  they  have  all  become  public 
property,  over  which  the  state  alone  has  control. 
Ground-rents  must  lapse,  because  the  old  owner 
of  the  house  or  soil  is  either  paid  oif  or  expropri- 
ated. The  state  must,  like  manufacturers  now, 
make  advances  to  the  workingmen  during  the 
process  of  work  ; but  it  will  have  abundant  se- 
curity in  its  hands  for  such  current  prepayments. 


OF  SOCIALISM  ” CONCLUDED. 


215 


The  state,  if  it  wished  to  borrow  on  its  own  cred- 
it, would  need  to  go  into  some  foreign  market ; 
and  for  its  ordinary  expenses  would  of  necessity 
appropriate  a part  of  the  productions,  in  the  crea- 
tion of  which  it  had  a share.  Credit  between  pri- 
vate persons,  all  the  operations  of  domestic  or  of 
foreign  exchange,  all  investments  waiting  for  a 
favorable  change  in  the  market,  all  speculation, 
would  cease  and  be  forgotten. 

Still  further,  as  private  capital,  employed  in 
trade  and  commerce,  is  impossible  under  the 
institutions  of  socialism,  all  trade,  unless  on  the 
lowest  scale  conceivable,  must  come  to  an  end, 
and  with  it  all  metallic  currency.  The  circulation 
of  the  social  state  will  be  not  greenbacks^  issued 
on  the  credit  of  the  government — for  socialism, 
with  all  its  wrong  views,  has  no  such  dishonesty 
in  it  as  that  would  imply — but  certificates  ofwork^ 
representing  labor  actually  accomplished  by  the 
workingmen — that  is,  by  the  community. 

We  turn  our  attention  first  to  trade  and  com- 
merce. In  society,  as  it  is  now,  the  whole  office 
of  exchanging  products  falls  to  individuals,  who 
act,  each  for  himself,  and  who  intend  to  remuner- 
ate themselves  out  of  their  transactions.  Their 
success  depends  on  individual  skill  and  enterprise ; 
and  the  consumer  is  protected  against  high  prices 
by  their  competition.  In  the  social  state  the  pas- 
sage of  commodities  from  the  producer  to  the  con- 
sumer must  put  on  an  entirely  new  form.  Com- 


216  sciiaeffle’s  quintessence 

petition  is  of  all  operations  the  most  abhorred  by 
socialism.  There  can  he  within  its  pale  no  buy- 
ing up  of  any  product  for  the  purpose  of  selling 
again.  Everything  (unless  in  some  employments, 
products  needed  for  the  family),  must  go  to  the 
storehouse,  and  from  thence,  by  ^‘social  means 
of  transportation,”  wherever  else  it  is  wanted. 
How  could  the  competition  of  dealers  begin  to  ex- 
ist in  such  a system,  and  how  could  any  dealer 
compete  with  the  agents  of  the  state  ? Thus  the 
sale  of  wares  in  the  open  market,  together  with 
trade,  the  profits  of  trade,  the  market,  and  the 
exchange,  must  cease  altogether. 

The  difference  between  the  present  order  of 
things  in  an  economical  respect  and  the  socialistic 
order  is  nowhere  wider  than  just  here.  ‘^The 
three  main  problems,  at  present,  to  be  solved  in 
the  market  (or  the  speculation  market,  as  Schaeffle 
calls  it)  are  these : to  determine  the  amount  of 
things  needed,  to  determine  the  quantity  and 
quality  of  productions  that  can  be  procured  to 
satisfy  men’s  needs,  and  to  keep  up  continually  a 
value  in  exchange  which  wfill  preserve  the  equili- 
brium between  production  and  consumption.  But 
in  the  socialistic  state  the  functionaries  who  would 
have  to  do  with  sales  would  ascertain  the  amounts 
needed,  would  distribute  the  national  work  accord- 
ingly among  the  different  classes  of  people  doing 
business,  and  the  persons  concerned  in  production, 
transportation,  and  storage ; and  would  assign  to 


OF  socialism”  concluded. 


217 


the  products  a value  according  to  the  mass  of 
socially  necessary  work-time  spent  upon  them.’’ 
What  contrast  could  be  greater  ? 

With  this  revolution  another  would  go  in  com- 
pany. The  corruption  of  the  press  in  aifairs  of 
business,  its  willingness  to  lend  itself  to  private 
speculation,  would  cease  when  private  competi- 
tion ceased ; and  the  whole  system  of  costly  and 
luxurious  advertisements,  as  well  as  the  enormous 
expense  for  the  rent  of  elegant  shops,  would  no 
longer  be  of  any  use. 

A metallic  currency  would  disappear  from  the 
socialistic  state,  as  readily  and  as  soon  as  private 
capital  and  its  operations  should  disappear.  It 
would  not  be  needed  between  the  members  of 
such  a community  any  more  than  between  the 
members  of  a family.  In  balances  of  trade  with 
foreign  countries  it  would  be  of  use ; but  not  in 
settling  balances  within  the  state  itself.  That 
gold  and  silver  would  play  no  great  part  in  such 
a state  is  plain  from  the  consideration  of  their 
leading  functions.  As  measures  of  value  they 
are  superseded  by  the  average  value  of  labor,  es- 
timated by  the  whole  sum  of  social  products.  As 
a circulating  medium  they  would  be  superseded 
by  tickets  or  certificates  of  actual  labor  in  the 
past,  which  would  be  effective  and  current,  as  long 
as  anything  was  in  the  government-stores,  sub- 
ject to  the  calls  of  the  people. 

This  species  of  time-money  will  also  suflice  for 
10 


218 


SCHAEFFLERS  QUINTESSENCE 

the  expenses  of  the  public,  as  well  as  for  the  sat- 
isfaction of  personal  wants.  The  socialistic  state, 
it  must  be  remembered,  like  every  other  state,  has 
nothing  to  pay  its  own  expenses  with.  It  must 
draw  all  its  supplies  from  its  own  working  people. 
Of  course,  if  public  expenses  (for  the  state,  the 
commune,  the  schools,  etc.)  needed  one-third  of 
the  value  of  the  hours  of  work,  the  certificates  for 
these  hours  must  be  good  to  the  workingman  or 
other  holder  for  two-thirds  of  their  woi’th.  The 
state  would  need  to  dispose  of  its  third  of  prod- 
ucts remaining  in  the  storehouses  as  it  best 
might.  That  at  times,  as  in  famine  or  sudden 
war,  a state  which  cannot  readily  borrow  money, 
as  a socialistic  state  could  not,  must  be  brought 
into  serious  straits  is  quite  evident. 

At  this  point  Mr.  Schaeffie  notices  two  difficul- 
ties, one  of  which  has  met  us  before.  This  is  the 
theoretical  and  fundamental  point  of  determining 
the  value  of  commodities  by  the  cost  of  work 
alone,  without  taking  demand  into  consideration. 
The  other  is  a practical  difficulty — whether  the 
socialistic  state  could  ever  master  the  enormous 
book-keeping  necessary  for  its  purposes,^  and 
could  bring  unlike  kinds  of  work  into  just  rela- 
tions by  a standard  of  equal  lengths  of  working 
time.  He  gives  no  confident  answer  to  these 
questions  of  his  own.  “ In  itself  considered,”  he 
remarks,  ^‘to  make  use  of  the  factor  of  utilitj^  in 
estimating  social  values  is  not  a thing  inconceiva- 


OF  SOCIALISM  ” CONCLUDED. 


219 


ble.  Where  all  production  goes  forward  on  one 
plan,  it  will  soon  be  perceived  when  and  where  a 
particular  production  exceeds  or  falls  below  the 
public  demand.  In  the  existing  form  of  industry, 
this  is  known  by  prices  in  the  market.  Produc- 
tion is  diminished,  and  individuals  seek  employ- 
ment elsewhere.  This  law  of  industry,  now  act- 
ing where  capital  and  private  property  are  found, 
must  enter  into  the  social  system.  The  present 
error  of  socialists,  in  making  value  [i,  e.,  value 
in  exchange]  the  only  factor  in  estimating  costs, 
must  be  given  up  in  regard  to  the  appraisal 
of  work  and  in  regard  to  the  appraisal  of  prod- 
ucts. When  the  value  in  use  [as  discovered  by 
means  of  changes  in  demand]  sinks,  both  must 
suffer  abatements ; when  it  rises,  both  must  have 
advances  made  in  them.  Without  this  introduc- 
tion of  value  in  use  into  social  estimates — that  is, 
without  imitating  the  present  market  in  all  its 
processes  of  settling  value  in  exchange — it  would 
be  impossible,  by  any  control  of  the  system  of 
work  in  a country,  to  bring  the  demand  for  com- 
modities into  harmony,  as  it  respects  quantity  and 
quality,  with  the  supply  of  work  and  of  goods. 
Three  things  depend  on  the  right  adjustment  of 
the  theory  of  value  in  exchange.  Firsts  this  pos- 
sibility of  preserving  a balance  in  such  a vast  mass 
of  work,  production,  and  wants ; second^  the  con- 
cession of  the  necessary  individual  freedom  of 
work  and  of  consumption ; and,  thirds  a general 


220 


SCHAEFFLe’s  QUINTESSENCE 

stimulus,  given,  according  to  economical  laws,  to 
individuals  in  proportion  to  their  working  power 
or  efficiency.” 

Unless  socialism,  our  author  concludes,  is  able 
to  unite  to  its  own  unquestioned  specific  advan- 
tages all  the  good  sides  of  the  existing  freedom 
of  work  and  of  economy,  it  can  have  no  outlook 
for  the  future,  nor  any  fair  claim  that  it  is  able 
to  make  its  theory  a reality.  It  must  remain  a 
Utopia. — We  add  that,  after  such  warnings  from 
political  economists  who  have  no  leanings  against 
socialism,  to  put  it  to  the  test  by  experiment  on 
the  vast  scale  of  a great  nation  like  Germany, 
until  impartial  experts  should  be  fully  satisfied, 
would  be  madness.  It  is  a pity,  if  it  is  ever  to 
be  tried,  that  it  could  not  first  have  a colony  of 
socialists  for  its  subject.  It  ought  to  be,  for  the 
safety  of  the  rest  of  the  world,  an  experimentum 
in  corpore  vili. 

The  last  stage  in  which  we  shall  accompany 
Mr.  Schaeffle  is  implied  in  the  questions  which  he 
undertakes  to  answer:  “What  shape  would  in- 
come eventually  take  in  a social  state,  and  how 
would  it  be  used  in  the  consumption  and  the  for- 
mation of  private  property  ? ” 

It  is  unnecessary  to  remind  our  readers  that  the 
entire  income  of  individuals  in  the  social  state 
must  come  from  work  (excepting  those  cases  where 
former  capitalists  receive  annuities  of  “ means  of 
enjoyment” — not  of  money — from  the  govern- 


OF  socialism”  concluded. 


221 


ment).  The  income  of  the  state  itself  is  drawn, 
in  the  same  way,  as  a uniform  deduction  from 
that  which  is  due  to  the  citizens — that  is,  to  the 
workers.  Whatever  the  state  had  fixed  upon  as 
necessary  to  meet  the  public  wants,  and  pay  the 
public  servants,  that  amount  could  be  directly 
drawn  from  the  store  of  products,  which  are  all 
under  the  charge  of  public  ofiicers.  This  ease 
and  simplicity  of  taxation  (or  of  getting  a public 
income)  has  not  been  set  forth,  as  it  deserves  to 
be,  in  the  socialistic  writers. 

As  for  the  possible  uses  of  private  income,  it 
may  be  spent  or  saved  by  the  owner,  or  be  trans- 
ferred to  others  on  condition  of  reimbursement, 
or  given  away  to  a third  person.  1.  The  use  of 
his  income — that  is,  of  his  certificates  of  work — 
would  be  uncontrolled  in  the  social  state,  just  as 
in  states  of  the  existing  form ; the  only  restric- 
tion being  what  any  state  would  impose,  that 
it  must  not  be  spent  for  uses  prejudicial  to  the 
welfare  of  the  community. 

2.  To  the  title  of  savings  and  the  formation  of 
private  property  Mr.  Schaeffle  devotes  quite  a long 
discussion.  The  substance  of  what  he  says  is 
this : While  no  property  producing  other  prop- 
erty can  be  allowed  by  the  social  state  to  remain 
in  private  hands;  property  in  means  of  enjoy- 
ment— such  as  articles  of  food,  clothing,  furni- 
ture, books,  works  of  art — may  be  not  only  ac- 
quired, but  transmitted  by  inheritance  [and  would 


222  schaeffle’s  quintessence 

naturally  remain  untaxed].  Socialists  resent  the 
charge  of  periodic  division  of  private  savings 
among  the  members  of  society,  as  well  they 
might ; for  if  such  a usage  were  introduced  there 
would  soon  be  nothing  to  divide.  In  regard  to 
inheritance,  it  is  true  that  hot-heads  have  wished 
to  abolish  it  altogether ; but  as  long  as  capital, 
especially  in  the  instruments  o^  production,  is 
taken  out  of  the  possibility  of  such  transmission 
by  belonging  exclusively  to  the  state  or  commu- 
nity, the  sphere  of  the  right  of  transmitting 
property  would  be  so  narrow  that  its  exercise 
would  produce  no  essential  inequality,  or  other 
disturbance  of  the  system.  Moreover,  if  allowed, 
it  might  serve  as  a stimulus  to  a larger  number  of 
hours’  work.  The  leading  socialists,  therefore, 
find  at  this  point  no  inconsistency  with  their  gen- 
eral scheme. 

Whether  socialism  is  favorable  to  family  life, 
and  to  wedlock  in  its  form  of  indissoluble  mono- 
gamy, is  an  important  point  v^hich  our  author 
does  not  wholly  pass  over.  Some  socialists  have 
had  low  and  loose  views  on  these  all-important  in- 
stitutions ; but  the  system  does  not  necessarily  call 
for  a kind  of  community  life  which  is  opposed 
to  the  highest  development  of  the  family. — The 
relations  of  the  system  in  itself  considered,  of  the 
society  cherished  by  it,  of  its  infiueiice  on  ideals  of 
morality  and  virtue,  lie  outside  of  the  present  dis- 
cussion, and  must  be  considered  in  another  place^ 


OF  SOCIALISM  ” CONCLUDED. 


223 


3.  Less  consistent  with  the  nature  of  socialism 
does  it  appear  that  it  should  look  with  favor  upon 
a loan  to  others  of  what  a person  has  saved  from 
the  fruit  of  his  toil.  To  do  this  in  the  way  of  a 
note  drawing  interest  does,  indeed,  seem  alto- 
gether opposed  to  the  purpose  for  which  capital 
had  been  abolished  ; but  to  do  it  on  promise 
of  a future  return,  or  to  accompany  such  a loan 
with  some  kind  of  pledge  or  insurance,  might 
well  be  permitted.  So,  also,  ^^the  concentra- 
tion of  larger  amounts  for  private  purposes — 
such  as  travel,  study,  common  efforts — would  by 
no  means  be  opposed  to  the  principles  of  social- 
ism.” 

4.  The  possibility  and  liberty  of  free  gifts  to 
relatives,  to  some  third  person,  or  to  a society  of 
persons,  would  not  be  forbidden  by  the  nature 
of  the  social  state.  If  the  sums  thus  collected 
formed  no  fund,  properly  speaking,  from  which 
interest  could  be  derived,  there  would  be  no  re- 
striction imposed  by  the  social  state  on  their  col- 
lection or  distribution.  Thus  all  the  purposes 
of  humanity,  benevolence,  and  religion,  of  art 
and  science,  would  meet  with  no  public  opposi- 
tion. 

One  point  needs  to  be  touched  upon  by  itself. 
Socialism,  as  it  is  apparent,  is  through  and  through 
irreligious  and  hostile  to  the  Church.  Socialists 
pronounce  the  Church  to  be  a police  institution  in 
the  hands  of  capital,  and  that  it  cheats  the  prole- 


224 


SCHAEFFLfe’s  “ QUINTESSENCE 


tarian  ‘ by  bills  of  exchange  on  Heaven.’  It  de- 
serves to  perish.” 

Hatred  to  religion,  however,  is  denied  by  Mr. 
Schaeffle  to  be  essential  to  the  system  and  nature 
of  socialism.  It  is  true  that  no  endowed  church 
could  exist  under  its  shadow ; lict  such  institutions 
might  be  maintained  as  could  be  supported  by 
voluntary  contributions,  and  were  not  connected 
with  worldly  interests  and  classes  opposed  to  so- 
cialism. Even  direct  support  of  the  Church  by 
public  authority,  out  of  the  national  income  [that 
is,  by  deductions  drawn  from  the  cost  of  work], 
would  be,  at  all  events,  possible,  although  not  veiy 
probable.  And  this  voluntary  method  might  be 
resorted  to  for  various  institutions  outside  of  the 
state’s  agency,  for  the  promotion  of  social,  religi- 
ous, scientific,  technological,  political,  and  social- 
istic efforts. 

Thus,  if  socialism  confines  itself  to  its  true  prin- 
ciples— that  of  realizing  the  system  of  collective 
production — it  can  come  into  opposition  to  no  such 
free  movements  of  unions  of  individuals  as  have 
been  mentioned.  “ Objections  to  all  this  proceed 
from  the  folly  and  frivolity  of  single  socialists, 
not  from  the  principle  of  the  system.  They  have 
no  support  from  the  politico-economical  principle 
which  has  more  and  more  become  the  central 
point  of  socialism ; and  which  will,  in  all  proba- 
bility, form  the  pivot  on  which  the  principal  social 
contest  win  turn.  The  destruction  of  the  ‘ high- 


OF  socialism”  concluded. 


225 


est  and  most  ideal  blessings  of  civilization  ’ would 
certainly  attach  itself  to  a wild  revolutionary  en- 
deavor to  make  socialism  a reality ; but  such  de- 
struction need  not  be  the  result  of  a development, 
in  which  the  question  at  issue  between  the  third 
and  fourth  classes  of  society  is  strictly  limited  to 
its  scientific  essence,  and  in  which  further  prog- 
ress is  made  to  adhere  to  the  path  of  specific 
reform.” 

We  close  our  consideration  of  this  able,  and  in 
the  main  impartial,  work  with  two  remarks.  The 
first  is  that,  when  the  author,  in  the  latter  part  of 
his  work,  shows  socialism  to  be  more  expansible 
as  a plan  of  industrial  society  than  many  have 
thought,  his  gain  in  this  is  rather  scientific  than 
practical.  All  that  he  says  may  be  true  ; but  of 
what  great  importance  is  it,  so  long  as  the  system 
itself  is  so  narrow  and  restrictive  ? It  is  as  if  one 
should  seek  to  show  that  a man  with  two  fingers 
can  do  every  sort  of  thing  which  another  man  can 
do  with  five.  True,  he  can,  one  may  say;  but 
can  he  do  as  much  and  do  it  as  well  ? Will  not 
society  be  lame  and  crippled  under  socialism, 
after  all  ? 

The  other  remark  is  that  a socialistic  state  may 
be  very  ingeniously  constructed  and  neatly  ar- 
ranged ; it  may  excite  the  admiration  of  able 
political  economists ; but,  after  all,  the  theory  of 
political  economy  is  one  thing — the  living  and  act- 
ing state — the  moral  entity  to  which  all  the  valua- 
10* 


22G  QUINTESSENCE  OF  SOCIALISM  ” CONCLUDED. 

ble  treasures  of  tlie  individual  man  and  of  society 
are  committed,  is  another.  To  this  higher  ques- 
tion— to  the  relations  between  this  socialistic  state 
and  the  most  important  human  interests — we  will 
now  bespeak  our  readers’  attention. 


RECENT  RELATIONS  OF  SOCIALISM. 


227 


CHAPTER  VIL 
I. 

RECENT  SOCIALISM  IN  ITS  RELATIONS  TO  THE  STATE  AND 
TO  SOCIETY. 

We  seem  to  have  now  reached  some  definite 
ideas  in  regard  to  the  plans  and  aims  of  German 
socialism,  which,  in  its  politico-economical  stage, 
is  commanding  the  attention  of  thinkers  in  all 
civilized  countries.  Its  programme  is  now  hon- 
estly avowed,  and  its  theory  is  ready,  as  far  as 
the  opinions  of  the  party  are  concerned,  to  be  re- 
duced to  practice.  If  the  hopes  of  the  most  san- 
guine members  of  the  party  were  in  any  respect 
prophetic,  it  would  be  successful  without  long 
conflict.  The  feeling  seems  to  be  that  the  upper 
classes  will  be  dismayed  and  be  ready  for  a com- 
promise, when  they  see  the  forces  of  the  fourth 
class,  or  proletariat,  arrayed  against  them.  We 
are  the  people,  the  latter  naturally  say.  We 
have  served  out  our  time  in  military  training; 
and  those  who  conquered  France  by  superior  dis- 
cipline have  a great  advantage  to  start  with  in  a 
domestic  contest. 


228 


RECENT  SOCIALISM  IN  ITS  RELATIONS 


But  in  such  a thorough  change  of  societj^  as 
socialism  contemplates  there  is  no  room  for  com- 
promise. The  plan  is  to  take  away  all  the  means 
of  production — all  land,  machinery,  manufacto- 
ries, all  means  of  transport — from  private  per- 
sons, and  transfer  property  in  them  to  the  state ; 
to  abolish  all  private  trade,  credit,  business  rela- 
tions, and  the  medium  of  circulation,  without 
which  these  could  not  go  on ; so  that  there  is  not 
a work  in  life,  not  an  employment  or  pursuit,  that 
would  not  be  put  on  a wholly  new  basis.  What 
room  for  compromise  is  there  here  ? There  never 
was  a revolution  in  history,  since  history  told  the 
story  of  the  world,  so  complete  as  this.  Nations 
have  passed  under  the  sway  of  conquerors;  but 
an  age  or  two  brought  back  the  rights  of  property 
and  free  management  of  their  affairs  to  multi- 
. tildes  of  the  conquered.  Nations  have  been  de- 
ported to  distant  settlements;  but  multitudes 
throve  in  the  land  of  exile,  or  their  descendants 
were  restored  to  their  properties  in  the  old  home. 
Is  it  conceivable  that,  with  all  the  personal  evils 
which  stand  at  the  very  door  of  such  a change 
in  view,  multitudes  would  succumb  and  compro- 
mise rather  than  risk  their  lives  for  an  essential 
good  and  a sacred  right,  as  they  regard  it,  of 
themselves  and  their  posterity  ? 

As  the  issue  in  such  a conflict  is  uncertain,  so 
the  form  which  the  state,  constructed  on  the  ruins 
of  private  property  would  assume,  would  be  un- 


TO  THE  STATE  AND  TO  SOCIETY. 


229 


certain,  except  so  far  as  the  industrial  changes 
should  require  some  special  conformation  of  the 
government.  We  have,  then,  a problem  to  solve, 
when  the  social  state  is  to  be  considered,  which 
has  to  take  some  uncertain  factors  into  account. 
Butnve  have  more  right  to  speculate  on  this  point 
than  socialists  themselves  have ; for  our  specula- 
tions can  do  little  harm  if  they  prove  false,  while 
theirs,  if  they  prove  false,  may  involve  themselves 
and  their  countries  in  remediless  ruin. 

Properly  speaking,  we  need  to  look  at  two 
points — the  governments  under  which  the  social- 
ists hope  to  carry  out  their  industrial  theory,  and 
the  form  of  state  polity  which  the  theory  itself 
seems  to  render  necessary.  As  for  the  inclina- 
tions and  opinions  of  the  socialists  and  commu- 
nists, there  is  no  question  that,  as  a body,  from 
the  commencement  of  the  French  Revolution, 
both  in  France  and  elsewhere,  they  have  leaned 
toward  the  principle  of  equality  as  the  main 
foundation  of  a well-regulated  state.  But  equal- 
ity is  a broad  term,  and  the  question  at  once 
arises  how  much  must  it  include  ? Liberty  and 
equality  stand  side  by  side  in  all  the  declarations 
of  French  political  Utopias.  But  it  is  evident 
that,  if  personal  liberty  has  the  breadth  of  rights 
which  is  conceded  to  it  even  in  some  arbitrary 
governments,  equality  of  condition  and  inequality 
of  situation,  or  of  amount  of  worldly  advantages, 
may  be  found  together ; so  that  a conflict  must 


230  RECENT  SOCIALISM  IN  ITS  RELATIONS 

necessarily  arise  between  the  two,  which  cannot 
easily  be  adjusted.  Equality  of  condition^  the 
absence  of  all  ranks  and  orders,  secured  by  con- 
stitutions, would  be  accepted  by  all  socialists  as  a 
sine  qua  non^  before  the  working  class  can  be 
raised  above  the  disadvantages  which  encoifhter 
them  in  modern  society ; but  inequality  of  situa- 
tion^ some  power  by  which  the  free  action  of  an 
individual  may  enable  him  to  rise  above  a general 
level,  is  clung  to,  in  existing  society,  far  more  te- 
naciously than  the  proper  democratic  principle  of 
equality  in  political  rights  and  the  sameness  of 
condition  throughout  society. 

The  feeling  of  equality,  then,  is  not  confined  to 
the  equal  diffusion  of  political  rights ; but  it  ex- 
tends to  material  advantages.  It  is  the  feeling  of 
one  competitor  toward  another — the  same  feeling 
which  has  led  and  may  again  lead  to  the  lot,  as 
preventing  a man  of  more  influence  and  ability 
from  gaining  an  oifice  by  his  ability.  The  world 
is  not  full  enough  and  never  will  be  full  enough 
of  material  goods  to  satisfy  all ; and  if  the  strug- 
gle for  them  were  not  checked  by  the  social  sys- 
tem, one  would  secure  for  himself  more  than 
another,  if  the  state  did  not  interpose.  It  is  not 
to  be  denied  that  evils  attend  on  the  present  sys- 
tem of  unlimited  power  to  gain  wealth ; but  the 
point  which  we  now  make  is  that,  in  seeking  to 
prevent  these  evils,  the  social  theories  find  it 
necessary  to  restrict  the  freedom  of  individuals, 


TO  THE  STATE  AND  TO  SOCIETY. 


231 


especially  the  power  of  rising  by  enterprise, 
soundness  of  judgment,  unbounded  energy,  and 
other  qualities,  which  not  only  aid  the  individual 
in  his  advancement,  but  contribute  to  the  im- 
provement of  general  society. 

When  the  individual  is  confined  by  law  and 
public  institutions  in  his  sphere  of  operations, 
society  loses  a great  part  of  its  force ; and  the 
state  must  acquire  an  equal  or  greater  amount  of 
force,  or  all  the  hopes  of  a community  will  be  ship- 
wrecked. Thus,  if  private  capital  is  to  cease,  the 
state  must  have  the  new  function  of  general  busi- 
ness director,  or  there  will  soon  be  no  state  at  all. 
Is  it  not  perfectly  evident  that  the  state  must  be- 
come exceedingly  strong  to  undertake  such  new 
duties,  in  addition  to  many  of  its  old  ones  ? And 
may  we  not  argue  with  certainty,  from  the  checks 
which  society,  as  it  now  is,  puts  on  the  occasional 
violence  and  arbitrary  power  of  the  state,  that, 
when  society  is  stripped  of  its  force  in  opinion 
and  in  action,  a vast  increase  of  independence, 
even  a despotical  sway  must  be  gained  by  the 
state  from  this  source  also  ? 

The  state,  then,  under  socialism  must  become 
strong  and  uncontrollable,  not  only  because  new 
offices  are  committed  to  it,  but  also  because  these 
offices  are  taken  away  from  society  and  from  its 
individual  members,  who  now  will  no  longer  be 
able  to  oppose,  or  correct,  or  enlighten  the  state 
in  favor  of  the  interests  of  general  society.  What 


232  RECENT  SOCIALISM  IN  ITS  RELATIONS 

the  form  of  the  state  in  its  socialistic  era  would  be 
is  of  little  importance.  The  essential  characteris- 
tic is  that  it  must  become  all  but  unlimited ; and 
our  readers  are  well  aware  that  all  unlimited  gov- 
ernments are  more  like  one  another,  whether 
they  be  called  monarchies  or  oligarchies  or  dem- 
ocracies, than  they  are  each  like  to  a limited  gov- 
ernment of  their  own  name.  We  can  hardly 
question  that  genuine  socialists  would  prefer  that 
constitution  which  was  best  for  their  purposes. 
If  it  were  an  unlimited  monarchy,  provided  no 
ranks  or  orders  were  allowed  to  exist,  it  could 
pass  with  the  greatest  ease  into  an  unlimited 
democracy  and  vice  versa.  [See  Appendix  I., 
end  of  this  chapter.] 

There  is  no  doubt  that  during  the  period  of 
strife  with  other  parties  the  socialists  will  contend 
for  universal  suffrage^  and  that  their  agitators 
will  maintain  democratic  principles ; but,  as  one 
of  their  friends  asserts,  when  they  have  reached 
their  goal,  they  may  find  the  general  vote  no 
longer  essentially  required.  Their  public  mani- 
festoes, however,  such  as  the  programmes  of  Eisen- 
ach and  Gotha,  breathe  the  democratic  spirit  in 
an  extreme.  What  can  be  more  so  than  the  de- 
mands made  at  Gotha  of  direct  legislation,  and 
of  decision  concerning  war  and  peace  by  the  peo- 
ple? But  the  leaders,  doubtless,  have  much 
wiser  opinions  of  their  own.  Schaeffle  says 

Quintessenz,”  p.  29)  that  the  general  right  to 


TO  THE  STATE  AND  TO  SOCIETY. 


233 


vote  would  not  be  absolutely  necessary  for  social- 
ism after  it  had  reached  its  goal.” 

A strong  government  would  be  especially  need- 
ed in  the  period  of  transition  and  the  beginnings 
of  the  new  state ; for  then  old  memories  would 
not  have  died  out,  the  power  of  combination 
would  not  have  entirely  ceased,  and  the  difficul- 
ties that  might  attend  the  working  of  the  new 
machine  would  encourage  its  enemies. 

But  let  us  see  how  the  destruction  of  private 
property  in  the  means  of  production  and  the  es- 
tablishment of  the  socialistic  state  would  affect 
individuals  and  their  rights.  First  of  all,  we 
mention  the  right  of  pro2yerty.  This,  we  have 
seen,  is  swept  wholly  away,  except  so  far  as  ter- 
minable annuities,  ‘^payable  in  means  of  enjoy- 
ment,” may  be  granted  to  such  rich  men  as  do 
not  oppose  the  change  of  order,  and  so  far  as 
workingmen  may  lay  up  their  savings  for  the 
future  pleasures  (not  the  future  profits)  of  them- 
selves and  their  heirs.  This  is  as  far  as  Schaeffle 
can  go,  with  a seeming  desire  to  bring  socialism 
into  a nearer  likeness  to  existing  polities.  And, 
furthermore,  there  is  in  such  a state  no  power  be- 
longing to  the  individual  to  rise  above  his  exist- 
ing condition.  In  fact,  the  author  already  quoted 
is  at  pains  to  show  the  social  party  that  freedom 
of  movement  of  laborers  is  necessary  to  act  as  a 
balance  to  changes  in  demand  which  must  come 
upon  their  industrial  republic.  But,  according  to 


234  RECENT  SOCIALISM  IN  ITS  RELATIONS 

the  programme,  the  workers  are  fixed  in  situa- 
tion, glehcB  ascripti^  and  removable  by  the  state, 
as  far  as  we  can  see,  from  one  place  and  work- 
shop to  another,  as  the  Roman  coloni  or  serfs 
were  fixed,  and  only  removable  by  the  proprietor. 
Is  not  this  the  beginning  of  a new  order  of  serf- 
dom, as  the  government  officials  of  the  workshops 
and  storehouses  might  well  become  a new  class  of 
feudal  lords  ? It  is  impossible,  if  these  conditions 
of  society  should  be  lasting,  that  some  new  rela- 
tions of  a political  and  social  kind  should  not  gain 
a foothold  in  the  new  order  of  society. 

How  far  the  workingmen  would  have  self- 
government  in  prosecuting  their  employments  we 
are  unable  to  conjecture.  In  the  ateliers  of  the 
French  socialists  to  some  extent  the  operatives 
could  elect  their  own  headmen  and  supervisors ; 
but  we  can  hardly  conceive  of  this  as  practicable 
in  a vast  system  under  government  control.  If, 
in  great  operations  at  present,  the  employer  or 
undertaker  has  great  responsibility  thrown  upon 
him  as  it  respects  styles  and  fashions  of  goods, 
changes  of  machinery,  estimation  of  amount  of 
demand,  and  other  particulars;  it  would  seem 
that  the  leading  managers  of  manufactories  in  the 
social  state  ought  to  be  invested  with  an  equal 
share  of  responsibility,  unless  the  system  should 
fail  utterly. 

There  is  one  form  of  labor ^ and  that  of  prime 
importance,  about  which  we  hav^e  seen  but  few 


TO  THE  STATE  AND  TO  SOCIETr. 


235 


opinions  expressed.  We  refer  to  agriculture. 
Here  the  analogy  of  manufacturing  industry 
readily  suggests  itself,  and  farming  on  a great 
scale,  placed  in  the  hands  of  an  association  of 
laborers,  is  one  of  the  forms  most  naturally 
thought  of.  The  association  pays  the  state  a 
rent;  or  the  system  is  managed  exactly  as  a 
manufactory  would  be,  the  laborers  receiving 
tickets  for  their  hours’  work,  the  cost  of  this 
labor  being  estimated  after  long  calculation,  and 
the  tickets  entitling  the  holder  to  draw  from  the 
storehouses  whatever  he  may  desire,  according  to 
the  amount  of  his  claims.  But  it  is  obvious  that, 
as  men  will  till  separate  pieces  of  ground  and 
must  use  in  part  their  own  products  for  daily 
consumption,  the  difficulties  attending  exact  equal- 
ity of  distribution  will  be  great.  As  this  class  of 
workingmen  in  some  countries  quite  outnumbers 
all  others,  the  problem  is  not  only  difficult,  but 
of  vast  importance.  It  would  seem  that  their 
liberty  of  moving  from  one  place  to  another 
would  naturally  be  more  restricted  than  that  of 
manufacturing  workmen.  [See  Appendix  II., 
end  of  chapter.] 

The  intercourse  of  a socialistic  country  with 
foreign  parts  would  wholly  fall  under  the  state’s 
control  and  direction.  Such  intercourse  would 
be  necessary  for  procuring  raw  materials  which 
could  not  be  cultivated  at  home,  and  articles  of 
luxury  from  tropical  countries.  The  commerce 


236  RECENT  SOCIALISM  IN  ITS  RELATIONS 

could  not  be  of  great  amount,  and  might  be  left 
in  the  hands  of  some  maritime  nation. 

The  finances  of  the  social  state  have  already 
been  noticed.  They  would  be  managed  in  the 
simplest  manner*  possible,  as  far  as  the  original 
levy  should  go ; for  they  are  nothing  but  first- 
fruits  of  the  productions  of  the  people.  When 
thus  gathered,  the  state  could  dispose  of  them  as 
it  pleased — at  home  or  in  foreign  parts — in  ex- 
changing its  receipts  with  military  or  civil  work, 
paying  officers,  supporting  public  charities.  We 
can  easily  see  that  it  would  need  at  no  time  to  be 
at  a loss  for  funds,  for  in  any  emergency  it  could 
put  its  hand  into  the  depositories  of  certificates  of 
labor,  and  take  the  wages  of  a day  or  a month  to 
itself  all  over  the  country. 

It  must  not  be  supposed,  however,  that  these 
taxes  would,  of  course,  be  a very  small  aliquot 
jyart  of  the  entire  product.  As  the  state  would 
play  the  part  of  the  employer-capitalist  and  of 
the  government  too,  it  would  need  to  expend 
money  in  both  characters ; as,  indeed,  we  have 
already  had  occasion  to  remark.  It  might  then 
be  found  that  the  bitter  complaints  against  capi- 
talists for  ‘‘  robbing  ” laborers  related  to  nothing 
which  the  state  would  not  do  as  readily.  And  in 
an  exigency,  when  war,  or  famine,  or  internal  re- 
volt, should  fall  upon  the  social  state,  it  would  be 
less  able  to  provide  for  the  sudden  call  than  states 
are  now.  To  borrow  money  at  home  would  be 


TO  THE  STATE  AND  TO  SOCIETY. 


237 


out  o£  the  question  ; to  borrow  it  abroad  would  be 
exceedingly  difficult. 

The  capacity  of  such  a state  to  engage  in  de- 
fensive  war  would  be  extremely  limited ; and  in 
offensive  war  it  would  be  a still  weaker  assailant. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  motives  for  attacking  it 
would  be  small,  since  the  change  in  its  polity 
would  withdraw  it  from  most  of  its  former  inter- 
course with  foreign  states,  and  it  would  live 
within  itself.  Internal  dissensions  might  be  fre- 
quent and  chronic,  as  long  as  old  local  feuds  con- 
tinued, for  it  would  have  no  strong  army  pre- 
pared to  repress  local  outbreaks. 

How  far  could  such  a state  secure  the  regards 
of  its  inhabitants,  and  would  patriotism  be  a 
strong  sentiment  among  them?  We  can  hardly 
bring  ourselves  in  thought  into  the  feelings  of 
such  communities ; but  one  cannot  help  believing 
that  the  ties  which  bind  many  nations  to  their 
countries,  even  when  they  are  misgoverned,  would 
be  all  gone.  Centuries  would  flow  away  before 
they  could  have  any  history.  They  would  live 
in  comparative  separation  from  the  rest  of  the 
world.  What  progress  they  could  have  it  is  not 
easy  to  imagine.  Their  institutions  would  have 
become  industrial,  rather  than  political.  The  en- 
nobling influences  of  political  and  historical  life 
would  have  all  passed  away. 

We  add  that  the  rich  diversity  found  in  the  so- 
cial life  of  the  peasantry  would  wholly  cease  under 


238 


THE  INDIVIDUAL  AND  RELIGION 


the  reign  of  socialism.  Every  civilized  state  in 
its  present  form  presents  the  spectacle  of  innu- 
merable differences  in  employments,  of  men  se- 
lecting their  professions — the  same  family  hav- 
ing representatives  in  several  departments  even 
among  scientific  men,  artists,  men  of  letters,  in 
the  learned  professions,  adorning  and  ennobling 
society.  There  is,  in  fact,  an  activity,  and  for  the 
most  part,  a hopefulness  in  existing  society  which 
adds  greatly  to  the  enjoyment  of  life.  But  all 
this  depends  on  the  freedom  of  the  individual 
to  choose  his  career,  and  the  power  to  choose 
greatly  depends  on  the  accumulation  of  property 
and  the  cultivation  of  mind  and  taste.  In  a so- 
cialistic state  all  this  would  be  lost.  The  whole 
mass  of  living  beings  would  be  devoted  to  work 
under  state  agents.  Can  anything  be  conceived 
of  more  monotonous  than  the  uniformity  of  such 
a system,  not  to  speak  of  its  incapacity  to  answer 
to  the  higher  wants  of  man  and  to  his  privilege 
of  shaping  his  life  for  himself  ? 

II. 

THE  INDIVIDUAL  AND  RELIGION  IN  THE  SOCIALISTIC 
STATE. 

If  the  remarks  we  have  now  made  have  any  jus- 
tice in  them,  they  show  that  the  socialistic  state 
would  increase  in  power  by  taking  away  power 


IN  THE  SOCIALISTIC  STATE. 


239 


from  individuals,  and  from  voluntary  communi- 
ties of  whatever  kind.  The  number  of  persons 
freely  using  their  own  exertions  for  their  own 
support  would  dwindle  down  almost  to  zero. 
Associations  united  together  by  any  tie  except 
that  of  common  work  would  be  almost  unknown. 
Especially  would  the  state,  as  the  director  of 
nearly  all  work,  so  impress  its  power  on  society,  in 
its  various  communities,  that  opposition  to  the 
will  of  the  state  would  be  feeble ; and,  if  not 
fear,  at  least  a want  of  interest  in  political  affairs 
would,  as  it  seems,  pervade  the  whole  nation 
There  would  be  little  of  enterprise  or  of  puhlio 
spirit  in  the  people  of  a state  under  such  a con- 
stitution. The  possibility  of  rising  in  the  world 
is  taken  away  by  the  form  of  society,  because 
there  is  only  one  class  of  people  besides  the 
agents  and  supervisors,  and  these  are  appointed 
by  the  government  or  by  the  communities.  A 
very  great  stimiilus,  in  states  where  capital  exists, 
is  imparted  by  the  form  of  society  to  all  classes, 
especially  to  the  humbler  part  of  the  small  proprie- 
tors. The  shoemaker  or  carpenter  in  such  a coun- 
try as  the  United  States,  the  man  who  has  one  or 
two  journeymen  on  his  working-benches,  is  in  the 
best  position  to  rear  an  honest  and  frugal  family. 
He  knows  the  value  of  knowledge ; he  is  a free 
man,  able  to  judge  and  act  in  the  affairs  of  his 
township  and  his  state ; he  values  education  for 
his  children,  if  he  had  not  had  its  advantages 


240 


THE  INDIVIDUAL  AND  RELIGION 


himself.  These  are  the  persons  who  have  an  in- 
dividuality of  their  own ; who  are  cultivated 
by  domestic  life;  who  are  not  in  a hurry  nor 
discontented  with  their  place  in  the  world,  but 
feel  that  the  world  is  a good  place  for  them 
and  theirs  to  live  in ; who  want  no  help  from  the 
government,  but  rather  to  be  left  alone  with  their 
rights  and  their  opportunities.  There  is  a vast 
number  of  such  persons,  in  a land  like  the  United 
States,  scattered  over  the  farms  and  in  the  towns 
and  villages,  who  have  a stimulus,  perhaps  with- 
out knowing  it,  from  our  form  of  society ; and 
this  spirit  of  enterprise  they  transmit  to  their 
children.  But  in  the  socialistic  institutions  I see 
nothing  calculated  to  inspire  hope  or  to  elevate 
the  workingman.  His  condition  is  unalterable, 
except  that  by  working  two  or  three  hours  longer, 
if  the  state  will  consent,  he  may  receive  two  or 
three  more  certificates  of  hours’  work,  which  he 
may  use  as  he  will. 

In  such  a state,  again,  the  circulation  of  knowl- 
edge will  have  obstacles  put  in  its  way ; not  by 
direct  power,  indeed,  but  by  tlie  nature  of  the  in- 
stitutions. Every  modern  programme,  it  is  ti*ue, 
of  the  workingmen’s  parties  of  every  name,  de- 
mands gratuitous,  compulsory  education  for  all 
children,  and  the  opening  of  technological  and 
other  scientific  schools  over  the  land.  Without 
doubt,  they  are  sincere  in  this,  for  the  agitators, 
having  the  boundless  possibilities  of  the  future 


IN  THE  SOCIALISTIC  STATE. 


241 


ill  their  hands,  can  weave  out  of  them  many  glo- 
rious visions.  But  let  us  look  at  the  spread  of 
knowledge  in  a socialistic  state.  In  whose  hands 
would  it  be  ? The  state  might  undertake  such  an 
office ; but  who  supposes  that  it  would  be  done 
well  ? The  state  might  produce  as  many  yards 
of  cloth  or  barrels  of  flour  as  were  needed,  and 
of  as  good  quality,  it  may  be,  as  capitalists  could ; 
but  neither  state  nor  capitalist  could  make  good 
books  to  order,  and  they  would  be  sure  to  be  bad 
if  the  state  forced  them  into  the  places  of  educa- 
tion. It  wants  freedom  of  thought,  independ- 
ence, a creative  impulse  to  make  good  books  in 
all  departments  but  pure  science ; and  the  state 
would  not  be  likely  to  let  books  be  printed  at  its 
expense,  the  principles  of  which,  in  government 
or  in  political  economy,  opposed  its  own. 

As  for  large  printing-houses,  established  by  as- 
sociations, they  would  scarcely  be  allowed  in  a 
state  built  on  the  exclusion  of  all  private  capital 
from  its  borders ; and  the  newspaper  press  would 
exist,  if  it  existed  at  all,  under  great  disadvan- 
tages. If  sustained,  it  would  derive  its  support 
from  tickets  of  work,  the  circulation  of  the  land. 
Its  machinery  and  buildings  would  belong  to  the 
state,  t)r  to  some  association  dependent  on  it ; and 
it  could  be  crushed  with  no  difficulty  if  it  became 
obnoxious. 

In  such  a state,  again,  there  would  be  little  of  in- 
telligent puhlic  ojpinion.  The  nature  of  the  state 
11 


242 


THE  INDIVIDUAL  AND  RELIGION 


would  prevent  all  free  spontaneous  movement. 
We  have  already  seen  that  the  mobility  of  work- 
ingmen themselves  — their  freedom  to  remove 
elsewhere  and  seek  other  work — would  meet  with 
obstacles.  The  parts  of  the  general  society  would 
be  poorly  united  together  by  the  intercourse  of 
friends,  travellers,  and  business.  Indeed,  society 
would  become  somewhat  like  the  old  caste  sys- 
terns,  with  the  upper  castes  left  out. 

Whether  the  state  would  tolerate  new  opinions, 
and  concede  to  advocates  of  private  property  the 
same  right  of  attacking  social  institutions  which 
socialists  now  have  of  attacking  the  present  in- 
stitutions of  society,  may  well  be  doubted ; for 
the  moment  the  political  economy  on  which  the 
state  was  built  began  to  be  questioned,  that  mo- 
ment the  state  itself  would  be  in  danger.  No 
sufficient  reason  against  a change  of  polity  would 
exist  unless  it  were  found  in  that  science.  That, 
therefore,  is  the  industrial,  political,  social  basis 
of  the  whole  order  of  things. 

But  we  have  gone,  perhaps,  into  greater  details 
than  were  called  for  respecting  institutions  which 
may  never  be  realized,  or,  if  set  on  foot,  might 
move  in  an  oblique  direction,  under  some  force 
of  the  ancient  order  of  things  which  could  not 
be  neutralized.  We  will  now  pass  on  to  another 
inquiry,  the  relation  of  communism  and  social- 
ism to  religion.  Here  two  points  demand  our 
consideration : the  first,  the  attitude  and  feeling 


IN  THE  SOCIALISTIC  STATE. 


243 


of  communists  in  the  past  toward  revealed  reli- 
gion and  its  institutions ; and  the  other,  the  in- 
quiry whether  socialism  in  its  nature  must  take  a 
certain  position  toward  religion,  or  whether  it 
may  be  or  become  hostile,  neutral,  or  friendly,  as 
historical  or  social  causes  may  determine. 

The  earlier  communists  — Plato  and  his  fol- 
lowers in  Christian  times,  who  conceived  of 
small  commonwealths  as  the  places  where  their 
theories  were  to  be  tried — cannot  be  called  ene- 
mies to  religion ; although  they  show  the  essen- 
tial defect  that  marks  most  philosophic  Utopias — 
the  want  of  a full  conviction  that  there  is  a de- 
fect in  human  nature,  which  nothing  but  religion, 
becoming  a force  within  the  soul,  can  cure. 
Plato  was  far  from  irreligion  and  insensibility  to 
religious  ideas,  as  is  shown  by  the  charm  his  best 
speculations  have  had  for  religious  minds,  both 
among  the  Christian  Fathers  and  in  later  times. 
But  most  of  the  communists  within  the  pale  of 
Christendom,  who  have  shown  some  sympathy 
with  Christian  ideas,  have  rejected  Christian 
facts,  and  held  simply  to  the  sentiment  of  love  or 
a somewhat  exalted  fraternity.  Out  of  this  prin- 
ciple in  France  was  developed  Religious  Commu- 
nism. This  fraternity  was  its  seed-corn ; for,  as 
another  has  said,  in  spite  of  the  Revolution  and 
its  fearful  irreligiousness,  the  old  faith  had  struck 
too  deep  roots  in  many  hearts,  and  even  in  whole 
circles,  to  be  entirely  banished  out  of  its  home. 


244 


THE  INDIVIDUAL  AND  RELIGION 


Of  Lamennais’s  influence  in  propagating  a form 
of  doctrine  into  which  some  Christian  thoughts 
infused  themselves,  and  which,  for  all  that,  was 
communistic  and  anti-Christian,  we  have  spoken 
in  another  place.  Others  followed  in  his  steps, 
with  a wider  departure  from  the  true  spirit  of 
the  New  Testament.  And  in  the  School  of  St. 
Simon,  as  well  as  among  those  who,  like  Leroux, 
were  at  flrst  scholars  of  that  school,  religious  ideas 
strayed  about,  as  if  trying  to  And  a home  from 
which  they  had  been  banished.  Leroux  himself 
had  the  same  theosophic  tendency,  without  a 
faith  in  Christ.  As  another  says,  he  held  that 
“ Christianity  at  its  flrst  appearance  was  a great 
step  forward,  and  comprised  truths  until  then 
perceived  by  the  highest  intellects  only ; but  that 
Christianity — such,  at  least,  as  it  was  understood 
to  be  during  the  Middle  Ages — ^has  exhausted  all 
its  juices.  It  has  produced  all  that  it  could  pro- 
duce for  the  advancement  of  humanity.  Since 
the  Reformation,  for  four  centuries,  it  has  ceased 
to  preside  over  the  movement  of  ideas  in  Europe. 
To-day  it  is  dead,  and  nothing  of  it  remains  but 
its  carcass.  It  pertains  to  philosophy  to  take  its 
place  and  to  construct  a new  religion.  The  ele- 
ments of  this  philosophical  religion  should  be 
found  in  the  past  period  of  humanity.  All  that 
is  to  be  done  is  to  collect,  bring  together,  and 
fonnulate  them.”  (A.  Sudre.) 

A large  part  of  the  thinkers  of  France,  and 


IN  THE  SOCIALISTIC  STATE. 


245 


nearly  all  of  those  who  leaned  toward  commu- 
nism had  discarded  Christianity ; but,  far  worse 
than  this,  the  great  mass  of  the  workmen  in 
Paris  and  other  towns  of  France  were  leavened 
with  unbelief  in  God  and  Christ.  A very  strik- 
ing passage  from  one  of  the  writings  of  Leroux, 
entitled  Three  Discourses  to  Philosophers,  to 
Politicians,  and  to  Artists,”  Paris,  1831,  so  power- 
fully represents  the  state  of  religious  belief  among 
the  workingmen  at  that  time,  that,  although  the 
extract  is  of  some  length,  I cannot  resist  the 
temptation  of  quoting  it : 

Since  there  are  no  longer  on  the  earth  any  but  material 
things— material  goods,  gold,  or  a dung-heap — every  man 
that  breathes  has  the  right  to  say  to  you:  “Give  me  my 
share  of  this  gold,  or  this  dung-heap.’’ 

“ The  partition  is  made,”  answers  to  him  the  spectre  of 
society,  as  we  have  it  to-day. 

“ I find  it  made  badly,”  replies  the  man,  in  his  turn. 

“ But  you  were  well  content  with  it  heretofore,”  says 
the  spectre. 

“Heretofore,”  answers  the  man,  “there  was  a God  in 
heaven,  a paradise  to  gain,  a hell  to  fear.  There  was  also 
on  earth  a society.  I had  my  part  in  that  society  ; for,  if  I 
was  a subject,  I had,  at  least,  a subject’s  right— the  right  to 
obey  without  being  abased.  My  master  did  not  command 
me  in  the  name  of  his  selfishness ; his  power  over  me  as- 
cended back  to  God,  who  permitted  inequality  on  the  earth. 
We  had  the  same  morals,  the  same  religion.  In  the  name 
of  these  morals  and  this  religion,  to  serve  was  to  obey  God, 
and  to  pay  my  protector  on  earth  with  devotion.  Then,  if  I 
was  inferior  in  the  lay  society,  I was  the  equal  of  all  in  that 
spiritual  society  which  they  call  the  church.  There  in- 


246 


THE  INDIVIDUAL  AND  RELIGION 


equality  did  not  at  all  reign  ; there  all  men  were  brothers. 
I had  my  part  in  this  church,  under  the  title  of  child  of 
God  and  fellow-heir  with  Christ.  And  this  church,  more- 
over, was  but  the  vestibule  and  the  image  of  the  real  church, 
of  the  celestial  church,  toward  which  my  gaze  and  my  hopes 
turned.  I had  my  part  in  the  promised  Paradise,  and  in 
view  of  that  Paradise  the  earth  faded  away  from  my  sight. 
The  soldiers  of  the  church  on  earth  were  at  my  service  to 
direct  me  and  aid  me  to  gain  the  celestial  church.  I had 
prayer;  I had  the  sacraments;  I had  repentance  and  the 
pardon  of  my  God.  I have  lost  all  that.  I have  no  Para- 
dise to  hope  for  more  ; there  is  no  longer  any  church ; you 
have  taught  me  that  Christ  was  an  impostor.  I do  not  know 
whether  there  is  a God ; but  I know  that  they  who  make 
the  law  scarcely  believe  there  is — or  pretend  to  believe, 
which  is  much  worse.  You  have  reduced  everything  to  gold 
and  a dung-heap.  I want  my  part  of  this  gold  and  this 
dung-heap.” 


Thus,  because  the  earth  is  an  empty  temple, 
and  Christ  has  left  his  throne,  there  is  nothing 
of  value  save  what  the  man  of  toil  can  clutch  and 
handle.  The  material  world  alone  survives  the 
ruins  of  faith,  and  is  all  the  more  precious.  So 
the  social  leaders  teach,  so  the  followers  believe, 
that  the  good  time  coming  is  to  be  a relief  of 
material  inequalities  and  discomforts,  with  some 
elevation  of  the  taste  and  intelligence  of  the  prol- 
etariat ; but  expect  nothing  from  the  power  of 
religion.  I must  believe  that,  in  Germany,  they 
have  lapsed  from  the  Bible  and  the  faith  of  Lu- 
ther to  as  great  an  extent  as  the  French  have  for- 
saken the  faith  of  Pascal  and  St.  Louis. 


IN  THE  SOCIALISTIC  STATE. 


247 


But  let  us  appeal  to  witnesses  drawn  indis- 
criminately from  socialists  of  various  shades. 
The  sentiments  of  Dupont,  secretary  of  the  In- 
ternational, and  of  Bakunin,  we  have  already  had 
occasion  to  cite.  We  place  first  in  order  a pas- 
sage from  one  of  the  writings  of  Marx:  ‘^The 
evident  proof  of  the  radicalism  of  the  German 
theory,  and  thus  of  its  radical  energy,  is  its  start- 
ing-point from  the  decisive,  positive  abolition  of 
religion.  The  critique  of  religion  ends  with  the 
doctrine  that  man  is  the  highest  being  for  men ; 
and  thus  with  the  categorical  imperative  of  over- 
throwing all  relations  in  which  man  is  a degraded, 
enslaved,  forsaken,  contemptible  being;  relations 
which  one  cannot  better  describe  than  by  the  ex- 
clamation of  a Frenchman,  on  occasion  of  a pro- 
jected dog-tax:  ‘Poor  dogs!  they  are  going  to 
treat  you  like  men.’  ” Again,  Boruttau,  who  has 
been,  I believe,  editor  of  the  YolJcsstaat^  said  of 
socialism,  in  1871,  that  “ it  is  a new  viev/  of  the 
world,  which,  in  the  department  of  religion,  ex- 
presses itself  as  atheism;  in  that  of  politics,  as 
republicanism;  in  that  of  economy,  as  commu- 
nism.” The  same  man  had  expressed  himself,  a 
little  before,  as  follows : “ The  hope  of  a satisfy- 
ing success  of  the  socialistic  revolution  is  a vision- 
ary Utopia,  as  long  as  we  neglect  to  root  out  the 
superstition  in  a God,  by  a general  and  thorough 
enlightenment  of  the  people.  As  none  but  social- 
ists are  in  a condition  or  are  inclined  to  do  this. 


248 


THE  INDIVIDUAL  AND  EELIGION 


it  is  oiir  duty  to  carry  this  work  through  with 
zeal  and  devotion ; and  no  man  else  is  worthy  of 
the  name  of  socialist  save  he  who,  himself  an 
atheist,  devotes  his  exertions  with  all  zeal  to  the 
spread  of  atheism.”  This  is  plain  enough ; but 
not  plainer  than  the  words  of  the  Yorhote^  a 
Swiss  paper,  uttered  about  the  same  time — that 
he  who  seeks  to  bring  science  and  religious  faith 
into  harmony,  the  function  of  his  brain  must 
already  have  been  sadly  brought  into  dishar- 
mony.” (From  Jager.) 

Let  these  citations  suffice  to  show — what,  in- 
deed, no  one  can  doubt— that  socialism,  to  repeat 
Schaeffle’s  already  cited  words,  the  socialism  of 
to-day,  is  through  and  through  irreligious  and  hos- 
tile to  the  church.”  But  a further  inquiry  sug- 
gests itself.  Is  this  so  because  socialism  is  essen- 
tially irreligious ; or  does  it  owe  this  quality  not 
to  its  own  doctrine,  but  to  the  men  who  first  pro- 
fessed and  propagated  it?  Has  it  made  the 
workingmen  atheists ; or  were  they  atheists  or,  at 
least,  impregnated  with  the  virus  of  atheism 
already?  We  close  this  paper  with  a very  brief 
answer  to  one  or  two  of  these  questions,  reserving 
the  consideration  of  the  essential  relation  of  so- 
cialism to  religion  for  the  next  article. 

First,  then,  the  old  German  faith  had  begun  to 
give  way,  within  the  church  or  churches  them- 
selves, some  time  before  socialistic  principles  were 
thought  of.  The  decay  of  religious  life,  the  de- 


IN  THE  SOCIALISTIC  STATE. 


249 


cay  of  religious  faith,  proceeding  from  the  efforts 
of  the  early  rationalists  to  take  as  much  of  the 
supernatural  as  was  possible  from  the  Scriptures 
— these  causes  acted  in  the  church,  and  in  the 
minds  of  its  teachers  and  preachers,  until  many 
from  among  the  people  began  to  think  that  the 
church  was  only  the  police  of  the  state,  set  up  to 
keep  the  lower  classes  in  order. 

Again,  the  freethinking  which  showed  itself 
so  mighty  a destructive  agent  in  France  spread  in 
Germany  to  a considerable  extent,  until  the  war 
of  liberation  caused  a reaction.  Then  Germany 
began  to  teach  philosophy  to  the  rest  of  Europe ; 
but  philosophy,  in  the  shape  given  to  it  by  Hegel, 
became  pantheistic,  and,  when  it  went  down 
among  the  people,  atheistic.  To  this  source  the 
departure  of  the  nation  from  the  faith  of  the 
Scriptures  must  be  ascribed.  So,  then,  the  work- 
ing-class was  not  so  much  to  blame  for  their  atlie 
ism  as  were  those  who  had  the  intelligence  of  the 
country  in  their  possession.  ISTor  was  it  unnatu- 
ral for  the  working-class  to  think  that  the  rulers 
and  the  upper  class  considered  religion  as  the  tie 
to  hold  the  country  together  and  the  restraining 
force  to  keep  them  quiet,  without  putting  faith 
in  it  themselves.  So  thinking,  the  working-class 
could  not  but  become  disbelieving,  and  despise 
the  upper  class  for  its  hypocrisy. 


250  RELATIONS  OF  SOCIALISM  TO  RELIGION, 


III. 

RELATIONS  OF  SOCIALISM  TO  RELIGION,  TO  THE  FAMILY, 
AND  TO  MARRIAGE. 

We  deferred  until  the  beginning  of  this  sec- 
tion the  question  whether  the  hostile  attitude  of 
very  many  socialists  to  religion  is  a necessary  or 
an  accidental  one ; whether  a theory  wliich  would 
abolish  private  property,  the  free  satisfaction  of 
individual  wants,  and  nearly  all  the  personal  value 
of  the  individual  in  the  community,  has  sympa- 
thies with  a religious  life  in  the  soul,  such  as  the 
Scriptures  set  forth ; whether  the  existing  want 
of  faith,  so  deep-seated  in  this  party,  is  likely  to 
be  as  permanent  as  social  principles  themselves, 
or  may  give  way  to  better  convictions  and  conso- 
lations, when  the  evils  in  the  present  religious 
order  of  things  shall  have  passed  away. 

Here  we  readily  admit  that  in  some  forms  of 
smaller  communistic  societies  there  has  been  sin- 
cere religion,  although  not  only  private  property, 
but  marriage  also  and  a considerable  amount  of 
personal  freedom,  have  been  sacrificed  for  the 
imagined  benefit  of  those  institutions.  But  these 
are  societies  voluntary  at  the  entrance,  and  gen- 
erally allowing  members  to  release  themselves 
from  their  connection  and  take  with  them  their 
property.  There  is  also  a certain  degree  of  pres- 


TO  THE  FAMILY,  AND  TO  MARRIAGE. 


251 


sure  from  the  outside  world,  wdiicli  helps  them  to 
be  true  to  their  convictions,  and  their  life  is  free 
from  many  temptations.  The  communities  as 
such  hold  property,  buy  and  sell ; and  the  indi- 
vidual members  feel  nearly  the  same  kind  of 
ownership  in  the  common  property  which  is  felt 
by  the  shareholders  of  a railroad.  The  people 
in  a social  state  are  to  such  a degree  unlike  them 
in  most  particulars  that  you  cannot  argue  with 
safety  from  the  one  to  the  other. 

There  is  nothing  in  the  nature  of  the  state  it- 
self which  socialists  propose  to  found,  from  which 
a good  omen  can  be  drawn  in  favor  of  the  cultiva- 
tion of  moral  and  spiritual  truth.  The  leaders  in 
Germany  are  Hegelians,  and,  as  such,  must  be 
fatalists,  so  far  as  to  recognize  no  personal  power 
separate  from  and  outside  of  the  world.  Hence, 
they  lean  toward  absolute  powder  in  all  things. 
The  state,  says  Ahrens,  has  an  absolute  power 
[in  their  eyes]  ; it  absorbs  everything.  It  has 
the  right  to  regulate  everything — morality,  the 
arts,  religion,  the  sciences ; the  individuals  liave 
no  rights  but  by  its  leave.  The  pantheism  of 
Hegel  concentrates  itself  here  in  political  panthe- 
ism. The  state,  the  present  god,  is  the  sovereign 
invested  with  absolute  rights.  This  apotheosis  of 
the  state  can  have  the  sympathies  of  political 
absolutists,  to  whatever  camp,  monarchic  or  demo- 
cratic, they  belong ; but  it  is  profoundly  in  an- 
tipathy to  political  liberty.  In  fine,  the  whole 


252  RELATIONS  OF  SOCIALISM  TO  RELIGION, 

philosophical  conception  of  Hegel,  with  which  his 
theory  of  rights  and  of  the  state  is  intimately 
allied,  is  rejected  by  conscience  and  reason.  The 
idea  of  a God-progress,  who  develops  himself 
across  the  ^vorld,  in  order  to  arrive  at  a clearer 
and  clearer  consciousness  of  himself,  is  a mon- 
strous application  of  anthropomorphism,  which 
transfers  to  God  that  wdiich  is  found  in  finite  and 
perfectible  creatures.  It  is  not  the  idea  of  God, 
of  the  infinitely  and  eternally  perfect  being,  who 
is  the  sole  foundation  of  the  moral  and  religions 
sentiments  of  man.”  (Seventh  edition  Droit 
Natiirel^'^  vol.  i.,  p.  75.) 

From  such  a source  few  gleams  of  a light  from 
Heaven  could  penetrate  into  the  social  state. 
Still  fewer  could  come  from  an  infidelity  or  athe- 
ism that  has  diffused  itself  among  the  working- 
men, and  which  would  not  be  averse  to  the  reign 
of  almost  absolute  will  in  the  state,  if  it  carried 
out  the  will  of  the  masses.  But  now  let  us  sup- 
pose the  state  established.  Is  there  anything  in 
an  absolute  state,  whether  called  by  the  name  of 
aristocracy  or  democracy,  that  is  favorable  to  the 
growth  of  religion  ? If  it  should  be  entirely  indif- 
ferent in  regard  to  these  interests,  leaving  them, 
as  it  naturally  would,  wholly  to  parents,  shutting 
them  out  of  schools,  and  making  religion  volun- 
tary in  the  strictest  sense ; religious  faith  would 
have  a poor  chance,  with  such  a start,  with  society 
against  it,  and  with  the  state  perfectly  indifferent. 


TO  THE  FAMILY,  AND  TO  MARRIAGE.  253 


There  is,  indeed,  nothing  that  we  in  the  United 
States  can  find  fault  with  in  the  declarations  of 
the  programme  of  Eisenach  (1869)  demanding  sepa- 
ration of  the  Church  from  the  state  and  of  the 
school  from  the  Church  ; or  in  the  demand  of  the 
programme  of  Gotha  (1875),  that  religion  be  de- 
clared a private  matter.  Nor  could  we  altogether 
dissent  from  those  at  the  Congress  of  Brussels 
(1868),  who  insisted  on  the  necessity  of  an  ob- 
ligatory and  integral  instruction — that  is  to  say, 
one  comprising  both  scientific  instruction,  sepa- 
rated from  every  religious  idea,  and  professional 
instruction.’’  But,  as  there  would  be  no  religi- 
ous education  in  the  public  schools  and  none  of 
any  account  in  the  largest  part  of  the  families ; 
as  religion  at  the  start  of  the  new  state  would  be 
prostrate,  with  no  ministers,  perhaps  without 
churches;  as  it  must  depend  for  its  support  on 
what  workingmen  could  contribute  from  their 
certificates  of  daily  work,  minus  what  the  govern- 
ment would  need  for  its  own  uses,  or  on  mis- 
sionaries from  lands  where  capital  was  still  in 
private  hands  (who  would  be  not  very  welcome 
agents),  the  prospects  of  any  common  worship,  or 
of  any  enterprise  among  the  few  believers  in  Chris- 
tianity, or  of  any  hope  of  better  things,  as  far  as 
human  eyes  can  discover,  would  be  exceedingly 
small. 

We  will  now  consider  somewhat  together  the 
relations  of  the  socialistic  state  to  marriage  and 


254  RELATIONS  OF  SOCIALISM  TO  RELIGION, 

the  family.  Here  we  come  to  a part  of  our  sub- 
ject where  the  socialists  complain  that  they  have 
been  misunderstood,  and  even  maligned,  by  the 
friends  of  existing  order.  The  Germans  forget 
that  the  opinions  of  Enfantin  and  of  Fourier 
must  have  made  a deep  impression,  and  that  it  is 
excusable  sometimes  to  charge  on  a whole  body 
what  only  a part  of  it  felt  and  thought.  Count 
Gasparin,  perhaps,  in  his  EEnemie  de  la  Fa- 
is  liable  to  this  imputation.  If  Fourier 
gives  us  one  kind  of  communistic  system,  Cabet 
gives  us  another.  His  doctrine  looks  toward  a se- 
vere monogamy,  and  the  amiable  man’s  heart  was 
evidently  open  to  the  pleasures  of  the  family-circle. 
He  honestly  believes  that  “the  inclination  be- 
tween parents  and  children,  he  it  as  lively  as  pos- 
sible, will  produce  in  a society  organized  on  a 
plan  of  equality  and  community  no  one  of  the 
evils  which,  in  the  present  system  of  inequality, 
it  brings  forth.” 

When,  again,  we  draw  a line  between  the  small 
communistic  societies  and  the  socialistic  state,  it 
can  be  readily  seen  that  the  former  must  put  the 
family  in  the  background,  >vhile  the  other  need 
not  have  this  effect.  Of  this  we  have  already 
spoken,  and  will  only  repeat  the  remark  that  the 
comniimity,  if  small,  supplies  the  place  of  the 
family ; while  in  the  social  state  there  is  no  such 
cause  hostile  to  the  family’s  just  place  and  influ- 
ence ; since  the  communities  here  are  for  indus- 


TO  THE  FAMILY,  AND  TO  MARRIAGE.  255 


trious  purposes  only,  and  nothing  more  than  as- 
semblages of  workingmen,  each  for  the  most  part 
having  his  own  home  there.  Thus  the  privacies 
of  the  family,  its  separate  loves  and  enjoyments 
and  secrets,  may  there  flourish,  if  no  other  causes 
besides  the  nature  of  the  state  prevent. 

The  question,  however,  will  naturally  be  asked 
whether  the  abolition  of  inheritance  will  not  act 
disastrously  upon  the  interests  of  the  family.  As 
the  socialistic  state  is  built  upon  the  destruction 
of  family  property,  none  can  be  transmitted,  ex- 
cept those  savings  which  take  the  form  of  mere 
personal  enjoyments  and  can  at  the  best  be  very 
small  in  amount.  Whatever  motives,  therefore, 
drawn  from  the  hope  of  leaving  an  inheritance  to 
a wife  and  children,  act  upon  men  in  society  as  it 
now  is,  to  promote  thrift  and  heighten  family 
affections,  nearly  all  these  will  be  lost,  when  so- 
ciety shall  suffer  the  changes  which  the  socialists 
threaten.  The  wife  of  the  workingman  must 
look  forward  to  a life  of  struggle  for  children 
yet  helpless,  or  of  greater  discomfort  and  poverty. 
It  is  not,  indeed,  likely  that  the  state  would  neg- 
lect the  care  of  its  helpless  ones,  for  the  aboli- 
tion of  inheritance  would  create  an  imperative 
demand  for  its  aid.  But,  however  that  may  be, 
the  prospect  that  a life  of  work  would  at  its  end 
leave  a family  helpless,  would  tend,  by  a sort  of 
law  of  society,  to  make  marriage  less  desirable 
than  it  is  now  and  less  sacred.  If,  added  to  this. 


256  KELATIONS  OF  SOCIALISM  TO  RELIGION, 

religion  should  lose  its  hold,  if  materialism  should 
prevail  as  the  spirit  of  the  community,  as,  with- 
out the  counteraction  of  spiritual  causes,  it  must, 
the  society  might  become  fearfully  loose  in  its 
morals ; worse  than  any  similar  collections  of 
persons  now;  worse  than  ignorant  Africans  on 
Southern  plantations,  because  now  a sentiment 
from  outside  does  act  on  every  class  of  men  to 
some  extent,  even  down  to  the  lowest. 

We  cannot  doubt  that  the  abolition  of  direct 
inheritance  would  cut  off  one  of  the  strongest 
and  least  exceptionable  motives  which  now  stimu- 
late industry,  economy,  and  the  domestic  virtues. 
With  this,  of  course,  we  include  the  claim  of  the 
wife  to  a portion  of  the  husband’s  estate,  which 
now  law  may  enforce  against  his  last  will.  If  the 
unity  of  the  family  is  a natural  union,  and  if  the 
permanence  of  the  feeling  of  unity  is  a vast  good 
to  society  for  at  least  two  generations ; the  hope, 
on  the  part  of  the  father,  when  he  dies,  that  he 
can  benefit  his  family  by  his  labors  and  savings, 
must  act  on  his  whole  life,  and  aid  in  forming 
the  best  civic  habits  and  virtues.  Fix  a maxi- 
mum of  landed  property  if  you  please,  but  do 
not  attack  the  transmission  of  property,  on  which 
so  much  of  the  morality  and  welfare  of  the  state 
depends. 

With  regard  to  the  sanctity  of  the  marriage  tie 
and  to  its  dissolution  by  divorce,  the  feelings  of  a 
community  will  hold  a due  proportion  to  those 


TO  THE  FAMILY,  AND  TO  MARRIAGE.  257 

which  they  hold  in  respect  to  the  family  and  to 
the  state  of  marriage.  Jager,  in  his  “Socialise 
mus^'^  remarks  that  the  possession  of  land  and 
soil  in  common,  if  it  arises  out  of  materialism, 
leads  also  to  community  of  wives,  as  being 
another  expression  of  materialistic  communism. 
This,  however,  is  a tendency,  but  not  a necessity. 
In  an  assembly  of  the  German  Workingmen’s 
Union  at  Berlin,  Hasenclever  (one  of  Lassalle’s 
friends  and  a member  of  the  Reichstag)  said 
that  when  the  spoliation  (of  the  working  class 
by  the  capitalists)  should  cease,  then  first  prosti- 
tution would  cease,  and  the  woman  be  given  back 
to  her  calling — to  the  education  of  children.  The 
•woman  question  would  then  be  taken  by  the  de- 
veloped socialistic  or,  more  correctly  speaking, 
communistic  state  under  its  own  control ; for  in 
this  state,  where  the  community  bears  the  obliga- 
tion of  educating  and  maintaining  the  children, 
where  no  private  capital  subsists,  but  all  instru- 
ments of  production  are  common  property,  the 
woman  needs  no  longer,  out  of  respect  to  her  chil- 
dren, to  be  legally  chained  to  one  man.  The 
bond  between  the  sexes  will  be  simply  a moral 
one ; and  then  such  a bond,  if  the  characters  did 
not  harmonize,  could  be  dissolved.”  Jager  (who 
appears  to  have  given  the  sense  of  the  words  of 
Hasenclever,  rather  than  the  words  themselves), 
then  continues : “ These  words  approach  already 
pretty  near  to  community  of  wives ; but  another 


258  * RELATIONS  OF  SOCIALISM  TO  RELIGION, 

orator,  Jorissen,  expressed  more  openly  tlie  re- 
moval of  all  barriers,  in  saying  that  a maiden 
who  disposed  freely  of  her  love  was  no  prostitute 
— she  was  the  free  wife  of  the  future.  In  the 
state  of  the  future  only  love  should  direct  the 
unions  of  the  sexes.  Between  the  married  wife 
and  the  so-called  prostitute  there  was  only  a 
quantitative  difference.  The  children  would  ne- 
cessarily belong  to  the  state,  and  the  state  pro- 
vide for  both.  These  views  did  not  exactly  meet 
with  full  approbation  ; but  they  met  with  no  op- 
position based  on  principle.” 

But  it  is  hot  quite  fair  to  argue  from  the  ex- 
pressions of  unprincipled  leaders  of  the  socialis- 
tic parties  in  Germany  what  will  be  the  feelings 
and  the  conduct  of  the  rank  and  file  when  they 
get  into  the  promised  land.  It  is  but  just  to  say, 
that  now,  while  they  are  under  private  employers 
and  capitalists,  they  are  careful  to  save  women 
and  children  from  overwork,  and  to  put  them 
under  full  protection  of  the  law.  Among  the 
demands  of  the  Gotha  programme,  ‘^within  so- 
ciety as  it  now  exists,”  we  find  prohibition  of 
work  on  Sunday,  prohibition  of  children’s  work, 
and  of  all  female  work  prejudicial  to  health  and 
morality,  with  other  regulations  relating  to  the 
health  of  dwellings.  They  are,  indeed,  by  no 
means  the  first  that  have  moved  in  this  direction. 
The  English  laws  for  the  protection  of  women 
and  children  and  for  regulating  the  greed  of 


TO  THE  FAMILY,  AND  TO  MARRIAGE.  259 

manufacturers  in  various  ways — such  as  the  re- 
striction of  the  liours  of  work  and  a system  of 
sanitary  rules — may  now  be  said  to  form  a code, 
with  supervisors  appointed  to  carry  out  its  pro- 
visions. The  evils  of  manufacturing  industry 
are  in  the  same  way  calling,  in  later  years,  for 
similar  legislation  in  the  United  States.  Thus 
the  law  of  compulsory  schooling  in  some  States 
imposes  a penalty  on  manufacturers  who  employ 
children  for  such  a length  of  time  as  would  inter- 
fere with  school-hours,  and  prevents  parents  from 
making  money  out  of  their  children  at  the  ex- 
pense of  their  education.  The  humanity  which 
is  shown  in  programmes  of  socialistic  parties  did 
not,  then,  dawn  upon  the  world  with  their  forma- 
tion; but  in  those  countries  where  capital  is 
strongest  and  labor  comparatively  most  depend- 
ent, there  the  spirit  of  humanity,  kindled  by 
Christian  faith,  has  been  at  work  to  oppose  the 
spirit  of  selfishness,  and  to  put  down  all  the  evils 
of  society  which  arise  from  covetous  disregard  of 
rights,  from  parental  neglect,  from  the  feeling 
that  material  prosperity  is  the  greatest  of  national 
interests.  The  socialists  had  better  wait  until  this 
humanity  of  capitalistic  ” countries  gives  up  its 
voluntary  efforts  and  its  humane  legislation. 
That  will  be  a strong  argument  in  favor  of  a new 
order  of  things. 

In  a socialistic  state  there  might  be  education 
for  all,  reaching  up  into  scientific  truth ; there 


2C0  RELATIONS  TO  SOCIETY  CONCLUDED. 

might  be  public  festivities  and  amusements ; there 
might  be  a severe  police  against  disorder  and  vice  ; 
but  I cannot  see  how  the  great  institutions,  which 
date  from  the  earliest  times  of  the  world  and  ap- 
pear everywhere  in  communities  raised  above  sav- 
age life,  can  be  secured  from  decay  or  how  their 
place  can  be  supplied. 


IV. 

RELATIONS  TO  SOCIETY  CONCLUDED. 

We  have  thus  far  briefly  considered  some  of 
those  results  of  socialism  in  its  last  and  most 
practicable  form,  which  flow  fr-om  its  despotical 
nature,  or  the  union  of  social  and  political  power 
in  its  political  theory.  We  have  also  looked  at 
it  in  its  probable  effects  on  the  individual,  on  re- 
ligion and  the  family.  We  have  found,  if  I am 
not  deceived,  that  it  takes  away  from  the  indi- 
vidual some  of  the  strongest  motives  which  exist 
in  civilized  communities  as  they  are  now  consti- 
tuted ; that  the  father  of  a family  could  not  rise 
above  his  condition  or  have  any  hope  of  rising, 
or  of  beneflting  his  family  after  his  death,  except 
to  an  extremely  limited  extent,  by  the  results  of 
his  industry.  We  have  seen  that  though  the 
latest  form  of  socialism  is  by  no  means  hostile  to 
the  family,  the  conditions  of  a society  under  its 
control  would  by  no  means  be  favorable  to  the 


RELATIONS  TO  SOCIETY  CONCLUDED.  261 


health  and  warmth  of  family  life.  We  have  seen, 
also,  that  socialism,  material  and  earthly  in  its 
spirit,  dependent  on  irreligious  men  for  its  prog- 
ress, supported  by  the  voluntary  contributions  of 
the  poor,  would  find  it  hard  to  keep  its  ground  in 
the  world. 

We  now  proceed  to  consider  a few  points  rela- 
ting to  public  order,  morality,  and  intelligence,  so 
far  as  the  form  or  spirit  of  socialism  must  affect 
them.  And,  first,  as  it  regards  security  and  quiet, 
it  would  have  the  same  advantages  over  the  present 
order  of  things  which  despotical  states  have  over 
those  where  the  individual  has  wdde  rights,  and 
is  little  under  control.  The  vast  mass  of  persons 
would  be  confined,  practically,  to  their  abodes. 
There  would  be  no  tramps,  no  public  beggars,  and 
no  strangers  coming  to  steal,  or  do  what  is  nearly 
as  bad ; for  how  could  the  former  travel  without 
tickets  of  work,  or  the  latter  pursue  their  trade, 
when  there  was  nothing  to  steal.  In  fact,  the 
eighth  commandment  would  be  far  easier  to  keep 
than  in  society  as  it  now  is.  The  sixth  com- 
mandment, too,  might  almost  lie  on  the  shelf ; 
for  if  now  a large  part  of  the  crimes  of  violence 
originate  in  desires  for  the  property  of  others, 
they  would  be  greatly  diminished,  when  property 
should  cease  to  be  in  private  hands,  or  be  in  such 
a shape  that  it  would  be  hard  to  seize  or  take 
away.  Then  a number  of  crimes,  such  as  forgery, 
embezzlement,  counterfeiting — all  crimes  in  fact 


263  KELATIONS  TO  SOCIETY  CONCLUDED. 

against  property,  and  many  of  those  which  injure 
the  person,  would  be  much  limited  in  their  sphere 
of  operation. 

And,  owing  to  the  same  causes,  the  complaints 
of  man  against  man,  which  are  now  brought  be- 
fore the  courts,  would  greatly  decrease  in  number. 
Where  the  state  did  all  the  business,  there  would 
be  no  private  breaches  of  contracts ; where  inher- 
itance was  unknown,  or  nearly  so,  there  would  be 
no  probate  of  wills  or  quarrels  growing  out . of 
wills.  Where  the  state  did  all  the  business  of 
transportation,  there  could  be  no  common  carriers 
besides.  And  if  an  end  were  put  to  all  these 
things,  society  evidently  would  return  to  a state  of 
things  in  which  lawyers,  judges,  and  voluminous 
statutes  would  not  be  necessary.  How  far  this 
simplification  of  life  would  be  an  indirect  disad- 
vantage by  cutting  off  some  of  those  causes  on 
which  the  spice,  variety,  and  spirit  of  life  depends, 
I will  not  stop  to  inquire ; but  the  direct  good  in 
several  respects  would  be  apparent. 

Yet  it  is  not  at  all  certain  how  far  the  commu- 
nities in  the  social  state  would  be  orderly  or 
moral.  Here  several  things  are  to  be  considered. 
What  effect  on  morality  will  a state  of  things  be 
likely  to  have,  wdiere  there  is  no  public  opinion 
of  a higher  class,  which  now  has,  if  no  other,  an 
imperceptible  infiuence.  Or  must  a higher  class 
crush  down  an  inferior,  so  that  its  tastes  become 
the  worse  because  it  feels  itself  to  be  below  opin- 


RELATIONS  TO  SOCIETY  CONCLUDED.  263 


ion  ? It  may  be  reasonably  apprehended  that  if  the 
workingmen  of  socialism  should  be  able  to  sup- 
port themselves — say  by  six  hours’  labor — their 
leisure  would  be  a snare ; that  beer  or  whiskey, 
quarrels  and  violence,  with  other  kinds  of  vice, 
such  as  gambling,  would  be  more  rife  than  they 
are  now.  A despotical  government,  however, 
would  find  it  not  difiicult  to  keep  these  things 
under  control. 

Another  and  a worse  form  of  immorality,  the 
crime  of  unchastity,  would,  one  may  fairly  sup- 
pose, be  peculiarly  prevalent  under  socialistic  in- 
stitutions. For,  as  we  have  seen,  the  abolition 
of  inheritance  must  deduct  something  from  the 
importance  attached  to  the  family,  and  the  low 
materialistic  views  with  which  socialism  starts, 
must  deduct  something  more ; nor  can  one  dis- 
cern anything  in  its  institutions  which  is  fitted  to 
counteract  these  unhappy  tendencies.  Divorce, 
too,  it  is  probable,  would  be  granted  on  insufficient 
grounds,  and  marriage  become  an  affair  of  con- 
venience. A lower  depth  would  be  reached  in  re- 
gard to  the  domestic  relations  than  that  to  which 
society  in  Christian  lands  has  hitherto  fallen, 
unless  the  social  state  should  contend,  as  for  its 
existence,  against  these  adverse  infiuences. 

As  a matter  of  course,  the  support  of  the  poor, 
or  more  generally,  of  all  who  are  incapable  of 
labor,  would  fall  upon  the  state.  At  present, 
property  does  this  work  by  taxes  and  bequests. 


2G4:  RELATIONS  TO  SOCIETY  CONCLUDED. 

and  whatever  Christian  states  and  Christian  soci- 
ety have  failed  to  do,  they  cannot  be  blamed  for 
indifference  to  the  needs  of  the  helpless  and  for 
want  of  humanity.  In  the  social  state  voluntary 
contributions  of  the  living,  and  bequests  from  the 
dead  would  be  in  great  measure  cut  off  ; and  the 
deductions  from  the  products  of  work  would  be 
gi'eater  burdens,  it  is  probable,  than  any  now  fall- 
ing on  the  humbler  classes  of  those  who  live  by 
labor.  Yet,  it  would  seem  to  be  feasible,  if  the 
state  should  use  the  proceeds  of  some  of  tlie  “ ex- 
propriated ” lands  under  its  control  for  the  purpose 
of  providing  for  the  helpless  and  destitute.  How 
the  numbers  of  this  class  would  compare  with 
tliose  in  existing  states,  is  not  a problem  to  be 
easily  solved.  Some  of  the  causes  of  distress, 
such  as  war*  over-trading,  and  over-taxing,  would 
be  less ; but  general  famines  could  not  be  met  nor 
prevented  as  easily  as  now,  v/hen  private  trade  can 
carry  with  ease  the  surplus  food  of  one  land  to 
another  which  is  suffering ; while  a social  govern- 
ment could  neither  borrow  money  in  a foreign 
land,  nor  send  surplus  manufactures  there  as  easily 
as  now.  On  the  whole,  the  problems  of  poverty 
and  bad  harvests  do  not  look  as  if  they  could  be 
m.ore  easily  solved  than  they  are  at  present. 

The  education  of  the  people,  which  states  of 
tlie  old  type  have  so  much  neglected,  or  even 
dreaded  and  opposed,  has  been  advocated  in  all 
sorts  of  social  programmes.  Yfe  have  spoken  of 


RELATIONS  TO  SOCIETY  CONCLUDED. 


265 


the  position  which  the  International  took  on  this 
point,  and  of  the  resolutions  favoring  compul- 
sory education  passed  at  Eisenach  and  Gotha 
(1869  and  1876),  as  well  as  insisting  on  gratuitous 
instruction  in  higher  schools.  Without  question 
these  expressions  represent  the  earnest  feeling  of 
the  socialists.  But  can  the  conditions  of  the  state, 
or  the  current  opinions  of  society  always  favor 
even  a high  grade  of  popular  education?  In 
states  as  they  now  are,  the  tendency  is  toward 
universal  education : every  class,  even  the  hum- 
blest, in  a large  paii;  of  the  United  States,  finds 
in  it  a source  of  hope  and  of  advancement  for 
the  children  of  the  class ; and  more  than  a few 
who  have  founded  their  own  fortune,  like  Packer 
and  Cornell,  have  established  places  of  higher 
education  for  the  benefit  of  posterity.  Such 
benefactors,  of  course,  will  be  wanting  in  social 
states,  where  no  considerable  properties  can  be 
accumulated;  nor  will  the  wages  of  laborers  be 
sure  to  sufiice  for  the  payment  of  their  children’s 
schooling.  Taxes,  therefore,  or  deductions  from 
tickets  of  work,  will  have  to  be  levied  upon  all, 
and  the  interest  of  all  will  be  to  make  education 
in  common  schools  as  cheap  as  possible.  It  may 
thus  be  imperfect,  for  the  training  necessary  to  be- 
come a teacher  takes  time,  which  must  be  paid  for 
before  the  teacher  begins  his  work.  As  for  high- 
er education,  the  demand  for  it  will  be  less  than 
now  for  several  reasons.  First,  several  of  the 


266  RELATIONS  TO  SOCIETY  CONCLUDED. 

learned  professions  will  be  eliminated  out  of  so- 
ciety, particularly  lawyers  and  trained  ministers, 
and  with  them  the  few  who  now  have  no  business 
for  life  before  them.  There  remain  then  chiefly 
physicians,  who  will  be  likely  to  be  government 
employes,  and  all  the  many  agents  with  various 
duties  whom  the  government  would  want.  Some 
of  these  would  need  a finished  education  in  phy- 
sical science ; others  would  get  along  with  one  far 
less  complete.  But  in  regard  to  learning,  espe- 
cially of  that  kind  which  spends  its  force  in  disci- 
pline of  the  mind  and  in  cultivation,  sesthetical 
or  intellectual,  it  is  not  easy  to  see  what  feeling 
there  will  be  of  the  want  of  it,  or  what  due  es- 
timate of  its  virtue,  or  ability  to  remunerate  it  to 
such  an  extent  that  it  can  have  a healthful  exist- 
ence. Nor  will  the  loss  to  learning  be  small  when 
the  upper  classes,  so-called,  shall  have  to  be  vdped 
out  of  society;  when  those  highly-trained  per- 
sons who,  in  the  state  life  of  the  present,  give 
the  tone  and  the  standard  to  a nation,  start 
thoughts  which  pervade  society  and  bear  fruit  for 
all  time;  who  keep  up  the  feeling  in  a nation, 
that  there  is  something  better  than  material  good 
things,  and  that  cultivation  of  soul  and  mind  is 
better  than  utilized  results  of  knowledge.  The 
presence  of  an  opulent  class  in  a country  is  much 
more  for  the  good  of  those  below  them,  than  for 
their  ovm,  particularly  in  this  matter  of  educa- 
tion ; for  if,  as  often  happens,  the  rich  have  not  the 


EILMAEXS  OF  BAEON  J.  EOTVOS. 


267 


energy  or  self-confidence  to  go  forward  in  a course 
of  hard  thinking  or  of  striving  toward  some  ideal 
goal,  they  awaken  others  who  would  have  slum- 
bered amid  empty  hopes. 

Can,  then,  a higher  education  or  a high  value 
put  on  common  education — we  may  add,  can  ges- 
thetical  cultivation  and  skill — be  natural  growths 
of  a society  which  gives  up  private  property,  which 
cuts  off  the  principal  demands  for  a learned  class 
and  the  means  of  encouraging  art  and  science  ? 


APPENDIX. 

In  reference  to  the  communist  or  social  state 
we  append,  at  the  close  of  this  Chapter,  re- 
marks of  Baron  J.  Eotvos  in  his  ^^Einfiuss  der 
herrschenden  Ideen  des  19  Jahrhundert  auf  dem 
Staat,”  vol.  i.,  ch.  11,  p.  276  et  seq.,  translated 
from  his  own  German  translation,  1854:. 

‘‘  I find  the  dislike  with  which  in  modern  times 
communism  and  socialism  have  been  attacked, 
very  easy  to  be  understood.  Even  the  greatness 
of  the  danger  which  threatens  our  entire  social 
order  through  these  doctrines,  explains  the  vio- 
lence with  which  they  are  attacked.  Yet  men 
make  a great  mistake  when  they  think  that  the 
dangers  threatening  us  from  this  source  can  be 
warded  off  by  the  unmeasured  accusations,  or 


268 


KEMAKKS  OF  BAJ^ON  J.  EOTVOS. 


wholly  false  assertions  which  are  brought  forward 
against  socialism.  Of  all  the  charges  thus  laid  to 
the  account  of  socialism,  there  are  none  which 
w'ere  not  once  made  against  Christianity  also.” 

He  then  proceeds  to  illustrate  what  he  has  said 
by  the  charges  brought  in  the  early  centuries 
against  Christianity,  denies  that  there  is  an  an- 
alogy between  it  and  socialism,  admits  that  the 
latter  can  make  its  doctrine  suit  the  wants  of  men 
in  society,  and  shows  that  it  has  controlled  at 
least  one  large  state,  that  of  Peru  under  the 
Incas.  Then  he  proceeds  as  follows  (p.  183) : 

But  all  this  shows  not  that  communism  is 
altogether  impossible,  but  only  that  it  cannot 
subsist  without  absolutism  ; and  it  would  be  doing 
injustice  to  the  communists  to  suppose  that  they 
themselves  have  not  seen  into  this  necessary  con- 
sequence of  their  system.  Hot  only  have  promi- 
nent teachers  in  the  communistic  school,  but  even 
those  who  have  employed  themselves  in  framing 
constitutions  for  Utopias,  for  the  purpose  of 
making  a higher  order  of  things  possible  among 
men,  have  acknowledged  that  an  authority  with 
all  power  vested  in  it,  was,  for  this  end,  indispen- 
sable. That  this  power,  according  to  the  commu- 
nistic theory,  must  be  conferred  by  the  free  choice 
of  the  community,  makes  no  essential  difference  in 
practice ; since  the  right  of  choice,  where  no 
other  franchise  is  left  to  the  people,  can  be  only 
of  short  duration ; and  communistic  France,  for 


REMARKS  OF  BARON  J.  EOTVOS. 


269 


example,  would  renounce  it  with  the  same  frivo- 
lous readiness  with  which  republican  France 
elected  Napoleon  consul  for  ten  years,  then  for 
life,  and  at  last  chose  him  emperor.  The  right 
of  free  choice,  moreover,  rests  on  the  right  of 
free  concurrence,  and  nothing  can  be  said  against 
this  which  cannot  be  maintained  against  that. 
How  then,  in  a system,  tlie  highest,  or  rather  only 
aim  of  which  is  the  establishment  of  equality, 
and  an  organization  in  which  universal  peace  is  to 
be  secured  by  the  exclusion  of  everything  which 
produces  any  kind  of  rivalry, — how  under  such 
conditions  can  the  principle  of  free  suffrage,  which 
is  in  such  open  contradiction  to  two  ends  to  be 
secured  [equality  and  non-competition],  be  long 
maintained  ? 

That  which  is  essential  in  communism  is  not  at 
all  those  single  schemes,  against  which  men  take 
the  field  with  great  outlay  of  wisdom  and  learn- 
ing. As  Cabet,  in  his  communistic  profession  of 
faith,  expresses  himself  for  the  continuance  of 
the  family,  whilst  others  hold  the  family  to  be 
inconsistent  with  the  system  of  entire  equality 
and  the  right  of  all  to  every  enjoyment,  so 
among  the  doctrines  of  communism  hardly  one  is 
to  be  found  concerning  which  the  most  important 
differences  do  not  exist.  The  essentials  of  com- 
munism, in  which  all  who  adhere  to  it  agree,  con- 
sist rather  in  this — that  complete  equality  is  the 
end  and  object  of  the  state,  and  the  unconditional 


270 


REMARKS  OF  BARON  J.  EOTVOS. 


subjection  of  the  individual  under  the  state  is  as- 
sumed to  be  the  means  to  this  end.  As,  now, 
such  complete  subjection  of  the  individual  under 
the  state’s  power  is  only  then  possible,  when  des- 
potic power  is  conceded  to  the  state,  and  as  there 
is  the  closest  possible  approach  to  this  principle 
of  universal  equality,  when  only  a single  jperson 
is  an  exception  to  this  [rule  of  equality]  ; it  fol- 
lows that  despotism  is  not  only  not  in  contradic- 
tion to  the  principles  of  communism,  but  also  that 
it  is  the  necessary  form  of  it,  and  is  that  form  in 
which  its  principles  can  be  most  completely  ap- 
plied. 

Not  the  victory  of  communistic  principles  is 
impossible,  but  it  is  only  impossible  that  these 
principles  can  be  realized  by  any  other  m.eans 
than  a completely  despotical  power.  The  victory 
of  communism  must,  therefore,  at  the  same  time, 
be  the  victory  of  despotism.” 

Similar  views  to  these  of  Eotvos  may  be  found 
in  other  writers.  We  may  be  allowed  to  add  here, 
as  showing  the  vast  increase  of  the  state’s  power, 
if  it  should  usurp  the  most  important  functions 
of  society,  that  the  exercise  of  force  founded 
on  the  judgments  of  the  state  must  constantly 
occur.  Thus,  there  must  be  something  like  an 
equilibrium  kept  up  between  different  kinds  of 
work ; work  in  the  field  must  furnish  adequate 
supplies  for  contemporaneous  work  in  the  man- 
ufactory and  in  other  departments  of  life  as 


VIEWS  OF  F.  A.  LANGE. 


271 


well  as  for  itself.  This  equilibrium  can  be  main- 
tained only  by  restricting  production,  in  some  de- 
partment where  it  would  be  an  arbitrary  and  per- 
haps cruel  act,  or,  if  there  was  an  absolute  over- 
production, by  sending  the  surplus  abroad.  The 
question  in  every  case,  which  is  now  settled  by 
private  persons,  would  belong  to  the  state,  and, 
as  far  as  we  can  see,  would  involve  the  state  in  a 
most  complicated  set  of  adjustments.  It  might  be 
necessary,  if  the  amount  of  labor  was  too  great 
in  one  branch,  to  transfer  laborers  to  another 
branch,  whether  they  could  or  wished  to  take  the 
new  labor  on  themselves  or  not.  And  to  every 
grumbler,  the  answer  would  be,  You  have  an  un- 
divided ten-millionth  right  in  the  state,  and  have 
got  to  work.  The  state  must  judge  for  you  how 
and  where,  and  how  long  you  must  work.” 


APPENDIX  II.  to  Chapter  VII.  (see  page  235). 

F.  A.  Lange,  having  been  charged  by  von 
Sybel  with  being  decidedly  in  favor  of  doing 
away  with  private  property  in  land,  replies  as 
follows  (Arbeiterfrage,  ed.  3,  note  8 to  ch.  vii., 
p.  403): 

“ I am  in  no  way  an  unconditional  adherent  of 
community  in  land,  but  only  an  unconditional 
opponent  of  the  prejudices  prevailing  in  the  coun- 
try against  this  social  thought.  I regard  commu- 


272 


VIEWS  OF  F.  A.  LANGE. 


nity  in  land  as  the  right  plan  only  in  those  parts 
where,  on  account  of  the  inordinate  extent  of  the 
latifundia^  no  private  ownership  of  land  exists 
as  a thorough-going  factor  of  social  life,  and  de- 
termines the  opinions  and  habits  of  the  people — 
this  above  all  in  England.  Yet  even  here  I 
leave  the  possibility  open  of  aiming  at  a satisfac- 
tory social  reform,  on  the  opposite  plan  of  divid- 
ing the  soil  into  small  parcels,  and  of  conveying 
it  to  small  land-owners.  In  those  countries,  how- 
ever, where  small  landed  properties  are  found 
to  a sufficient  extent — such  as  France,  Switzerland, 
and  West  Germany — it  seems  to  me  that  commu- 
nity in  the  soil,  properly  speaking,  even  on  ac- 
count of  the  deep-rooted  inclination  of  the  people 
toward  ownership  of  land,  can  have  no  chance  of 
success.  In  such  lands  social  progress  is  rather 
to  be  sought  for,  partly  in  free,  cooperative,  com- 
mon industry  of  neighbors,  partly  in  the  reform 
of  the  credit-system.  Under  all  circumstances, 
however,  I am  of  the  opinion  that  in  all  places 
wffiere  the  true  nature  of  private  property  in  the 
soil  is  destroyed,  and  the  right  of  property  has 
become  a bare  means  of  levying  tribute  on  foreign 
\vork,  as  it  is  especially  in  our  large  towns,  it  is 
very  foolish  to  allow  one’s  self  to  be  scared  away, 
by  vague  conceptions  of  the  sacredness  [unantast- 
harJceit)  of  the  foundations  of  our  society,  from 
measures  which  properly,  on  unprejudiced  reflec- 
tion, must  be  acknowledged  as  the  only  right  and 


VIEWS  OF  F.  A.  LANGE. 


2T8 


thorough  ones.  A law  for  the  expropriation  of 
property  in  towns,  or,  perhaps,  still  better,  for  the 
expropriation  of  ground-lots,  within  a girdle  around 
the  town  which  is  not  yet  built  upon,  I would 
rather  have  passed  to-day  than  to-morrow;  and 
should  be  sure  that  this  small  step  toward  com- 
munity in  the  soil  must  needs  be  accompanied  with 
the  most  beneficial  consequences,  if  earned  out 
from  the  beginning  onward,  in  a somewhat  rea- 
sonable way,  and  without  any  compulsion  in  ma- 
king transfers.” 

He  then  proceeds  to  say  that  the  plan  of  turn- 
ing the  present  landholders  into  leaseholders  of 
public  domains,  has  one  of  its  most  essential 
points  left  wholly  in  the  dark — that  is,  the  eventual 
termination  of  the  lease  [Kiindigung  der  Pacht]. 
Without  doubt  the  day  after  issuing  such  a uni- 
versal law  of  expropriation,  the  proprietors  would 
at  once,  and  in  a body,  find  themselves  in  the  con- 
dition of  lessees  of  their  own  soil ; and  for  this 
great  change  a payment  of  equitable  damages 
would  be  held  out  in  prospect — ^which,  indeed,  in 
the  case  of  a violent  revolution,  might  be  forgot- 
ten ; yet  the  intention  would  not  at  all  be  in  this 
transfer  of  property  to  stop  with  a lease-system. 
The  plan  would  rather  be  that  the  state  should 
now,  according  to  the  measure  of  what  necessity 
required,  and  of  economical  practicability,  give 
the  land  on  lease  to  those  who  would  themselves 
cultivate  it,  and  especially  in  the  way  of  associated 
12* 


274 


VIEWS  OF  F.  A.  LANGE. 


or  cooperative  work.  A law,  however,  by  virtue 
of  which  in  Germany  the  latifundia  (only  not 
all  at  one  blow)  should  lie  expropriated  and  given 
to  rural  workingmen  on  lease,  I should  unhesi- 
tatingly regard  as  a good  one,  although  here  the 
difficulties  in  carrying  out  would  be  greater  than 
in  the  case  of  the  towns.” 

Such  are  the  views  of  a political  economist  who 
has  decidedly  social  leanings,  but  does  not  be- 
long to  the  party  of  the  socialists.  He  would 
make  property  in  land  within,  or  near  towns, 
public,  which  was  fit  or  likely  to  be  used  in  build- 
ing houses  intended  for  rent ; and  he  would  pass 
on  from  the  expedient  of  converting  landholders 
into  leaseholders  under  the  state,  to  the  ultimate 
method  of  having  the  leases  of  such  a sort  that 
the  land  should  be  cultivated  by  cooperative  in- 
dustry. But  latifundia  (and  how  much  land 
would  be  needed  to  constitute  a latifundium  he 
does  not  say)  he  would  have  taken  from  their 
proprietors. 

The  plan  of  the  author,  taken  as  a whole,  to  be 
applied  in  Germany  and  England,  but  not  prac- 
ticable in  France  and  Switzerland,  labors  exceed- 
ingly. It  is  necessary  that  all  houses  and  lots  in 
cities,  as  well  as  houses  for  rent,  if  any,  should 
belong  to  the  state.  It  is  necessary  too,  as  it 
seems  to  the  writer,  that  socialism  must  be  uni- 
versal, or  must  be  the  source  of  universal  confu- 
sion. Yet  the  safety  of  the  state  and  of  private 


VIEWS  OF  F.  A.  LANGE. 


275 


property  seems  to  demand  that  large  landed  es- 
tates must  be  somehow  or  other  broken  up,  and 
the  number  of  persons  owning  the  soil  be  greatly 
increased  in  those  countries  where  now  the  land- 
lords are  comparatively  few  ; and  that  as  speedily 
as  economic  rules  will  allow.  And  this  ought 
to  be  made  permanent. 


276  IS  THE  OVERTHKOW  OF  THE  PRESENT 


CHAPTER  YIII. 

I. 

IS  THE  OVERTHROW  OP  THE  PRESENT  FORM  OP  SOCIETY 
BY  SOCIALISM  PROBABLE? 

Is  socialism  a mere  Utopia,  or  can  it  be  real- 
ized in  the  world — if  not  by  persuading  men  of 
its  truth,  yet,  in  the  last  resort,  by  revolutionary 
violence  ? Can  it  get  the  power  of  the  state  into 
its  hands  in  the  United  States ; or  may  we  treat 
its  boasts  on  European  soil  as  mere  bluster,  and 
much  more  so  when  they  talk  of  victories  for  its 
cause  on  our  side  of  the  Atlantic?  Or,  if  there 
is  no  real  danger,  is  there  revealed  in  this  agita- 
tion a social  disease  which  calls  for  a cure  ? And 
if  so,  what  cure  can  be  applied?  To  the  first  of 
these  questions  I intend  to  devote  what  remains, 
according  to  my  plan,  to  be  said  upon  the  subject 
of  socialism ; yet  not  v/ithout  the  hope  of  being 
able  to  suggest  a few  thoughts  relating  to  a cure 
of  the  disease  in  society  of  which  this  is  a symp- 
tom. 

If  we  go  to  the  bottom  of  things,  the  strength 
of  socialism — that  which  takes  hold  of  the  great 


FORM  OF  SOCIETY  BY  SOCIALISM  PROBABLE  ? 277 


mass  of  the  party — is  not  argument ; but  the  de- 
mand for  equality,  which  has  been  called  forth  in 
modern  times  by  new  views  of  political  rights 
and  by  the  concession  of  rights  to  those  who  had 
either  no  rights,  or  incomplete  ones  before.  The 
new  views  led  to  the  new  demands ; and  these 
seemed  so  just,  or  it  was  felt  to  be  so  necessary 
to  comply  with  them,  that  one  privilege  after 
another  was  broken  down ; political  equality  was 
carried  out  extensively;  and  civil  rights  were 
made  the  same,  or  nearly  the  same  for  all.  But 
the  feeling  of  inequality  was  met  by  a fact  as  old 
as  freedom — inequality  of  condition.  Some  mem- 
bers of  society,  whatever  may  have  been  the  cause 
— ^whether  it  were  birth,  or  education,  or  superior 
abilities,  or  better  judgment,  or  what  men  call 
happy  accidents — gained  wealth  or  comforts 
which  were  beyond  the  reach  of  others ; and  this 
more  advantageous  position  was  made  permanent 
by  laws  and  usages  on  which  society  was  con- 
ceived to  rest,  such  as  free  individual  movement 
in  matters  of  business,  the  security  of  property 
and  its  transmission  by  inheritance.  Moreover, 
the  progress  of  improvements  in  the  great  depart- 
ments of  labor  demanded  a concentration  of  capi- 
tal, which  made  it  harder  than  before  for  a man 
without  capital  to  rise  above  the  level  assigned 
to  him  by  birth.  Thus  equality  of  rights  was 
practically  counteracted,  or  made  worth  but  little 
for  great  numbers  in  society  by  the  consequences 


278  IS  THE  OVERTHROW  OF  THE  PRESENT 

of  freedom.  Equality  of  rights  was  met  by  in- 
equality of  condition,  which  seemed  to  be  grow- 
ing more  marked  and  striking,  as  business,  in 
order  to  be  managed  with  the  more  success,  re- 
quired larger  capital.  Thus  society  seemed  to 
have  a disease  fastened  upon  it  as  bad  as  that 
which  infested  it  before  the  new  equality  of 
rights  began ; and  those  who  indulged  in  politi- 
cal speculations,  out  of  sympathy  or  of  dissatisfac- 
tion with  the  present,  looked  for  a remedy.  The 
evils  of  the  social  system,  they  said — its  poverty, 
its  caste-like  proletariat,  its  plutocracy,  all  grow- 
ing and  growing  by  a kind  of  law — are  due  to  un- 
restricted private  enterprise.  The  remedy  must 
be  found  in  transferring  all  capital  to  the  state. 
This  train  of  thought,  w^hen  unfolded  to  men  wdio 
wanted  something  better  for  themselves,  and  ac- 
companied by  plausible  theories  of  a new  condi- 
tion of  industry  under  the  control  of  the  state 
alone,  is  socialism. 

It  deserves  to  be  remarked  that  the  feeling  of 
equality  worked  in  another  channel  also.  In  the 
older  times,  when  there  were  few  general  w^ork- 
shops,  and  men  w^orked  in  their  owm  abodes,  or 
when  workshops  were  small  and  this  craving  for 
equality  did  not  press  upon  the  laborers’  minds, 
the  master  and  the  workmen  got  along  very  w^ell 
together;  but  now,  when  great  w^orkshops  and 
great  capital  are  needed,  the  employer  is  a mag- 
nate, quite  above  the  former  position  of  his  office 


FORM  OF  SOCIETY  BY  SOCIALISM  PROBABLE  ? 279 


relatively  to  liis  workmen.  This  makes  the  dis- 
tance between  the  two  the  greater,  and  the  new 
feeling  of  equality  makes  it  seem  to  be  the  great- 
er. Men  submit  to  power  which  comes  from 
above  or  is  impersonal ; but  they  chafe  under  the 
personal  power  of  a man  on  the  same  political 
level  with  themselves.  Hence,  they  would  sub- 
mit to  the  state’s  direction,  if  it  took  all  industry 
into  its  hands,  rather  than  to  an  undertaker  or 
employer  who  is  their  equal  in  civil  and  political 
society. 

From  these  sources  come  the  advantages  which 
the  socialists  have  in  carrying  out  the  plans  of 
their  parties.  From  these  sources  I say,  and  from 
baseless  promises  and  theories  of  rights  touching 
the  returns  of  labor,  which  the  workingmen 
rather  believe  than  understand.  The  working- 
man thinks  that  he  can  lose  nothing,  if  Bebel  or 
Liebknecht  is  no  prophet.  He  can  gain  some- 
thing if  what  they  say  is  true.  The  world,  in  any 
case,  needs  him.  But  there  is  another  and  a very 
considerable  portion  of  society  wdiich  knows  that 
the  success  of  socialism  is  the  ruin  of  themselves 
and  their  families.  How  are  they  to  be  placated 
or  put  asleep  ? Not,  certainly,  by  those  violent 
denunciations  against  the  hourgeoisie^'^  which 
many  socialists  use,  with  the  effect  only  of  irri- 
tating that  class  and  of  alienating  one  class  from 
another.  But  for  this  policy,  the  “ bourgeoisie  ” 
miglit  underrate  the  resources  and  the  proba- 


280  IS  THE  OVERTHROW  OF  THE  PRESENT 

bility  of  success  of  the  social  movement;  but 
now  they  are  gradually  taught  that  it  means  noth- 
ing less  than  their  ruin,  their  extinction  as  a class, 
their  having  their  property  taken  from  them,  and 
their  reduction  to  the  order  of  state  workmen. 

IS’othing,  in  fact,  but  persuasion  or  violent  revo- 
lution can  lead  holders  of  property  in  a country, 
however  small  it  be,  to  acquiesce  in  so  com- 
plete an  overturning  of  society,  and  downfall  of 
themselves,  as  the  most  modern  socialism  con- 
templates. Let  us  look  at  this  alternative,  and 
especially  at  the  probable  success  of  the  social 
doctrine. 

One  very  important  article  of  this  new  faith 
is  that  a law  of  nature — if  so  it  can  be  called — is 
working  on  its  side.  The  present  is  the  age  of 
complicated  machinery,  superseding  the  instru- 
ments which  formerl}"  a single  man  could  own, 
and  of  vast  amounts  of  capital  in  individual  hands. 
But  the  change  from  the  plan  of  small  and  do- 
mestic industry  to  the  present  wholesale  industry 
is  only  a stage  in  the  progress.  As  the  house- 
wife working  at  her  loom  in  odd  hours  has  given 
way  to  the  tenants  of  mammoth  manufactories, 
so  the  small  and  less  powerful  of  these  manufac- 
tories iriust  give  way  to  the  more  powerful.  The 
larger  the  scale  of  these  operations,  the  fewer 
must  be  the  employers.  And  the  same  is  true  of 
capitalists.  They,  too,  must  dwindle  in  number 
while  they  swell  in  size.  Then  they  become  an 


FORM  OF  SOCIETY  BY  SOCIALISM  PROBABLE?  281 

easier  prey  to  those  whom  the  system  has  made 
serfs,  but  to  whom  constitutions  give  liberty. 

I have  touched  on  this  before ; but  I touch  on  it 
now  again  to  say,  firsts  that,  if  any  such  law,  fa- 
tal and  inevitable,  is  at  work,  its  progress  must  be 
measured  not  by  years,  but  by  centuries.  The  so- 
cialists have  done  existing  order  a favor  by  call- 
ing to  it  the  attention  of  men.  There  is  time  to 
decide  whether  it  is  an  essential  evil,  which  noth- 
ing but  violent  surgical  methods  can  cure,  or  one 
which  society,  once  convinced  of  its  existence  and 
growth,  can  remove  without  destroying  itself.  If, 
even  in  this  country,  unfettered  freedom  can  bring 
about  a state  of  things  in  which  a few  great  mer- 
chants, manufacturers,  ship-owners,  transporters, 
and  money-lenders  shall  absorb  the  capital  of  the 
country,  it  will  then  be  the  time  to  rectify  the 
evil,  if  it  can  be  done,  by  appropriate  legislation. 
Meanwhile,  w^e  will  live  in  hope  of  something  less 
radical  than  the  destruction  of  society  in  order 
to  destroy  the  evils  growing  out  of  private  capi- 
tal. 

And,  again^  I doubt  very  much  whether  the 
socialists  can  persuade  men  that  the  additional 
value,  conferred  by  the  labor  of  operatives  on 
materials  put  into  their  hands,  wholly  belongs  to 
them,  so  that  they  are  plundered  by  their  employ- 
ers, when  they  are  paid  on  the  present  system. 
Nor  will  men,  I imagine,  be  made  to  see  that  the 
state  can  compensate  in  a way,  or  to  an  amount. 


282  IS  THE  OVEETHROW  OF  THE  PRESENT 

unlike  which  is  current  in  the  present  day.  For 
both  state  and  employer  pay  for  all  the  instru- 
ments of  production  and  the  material  to  be 
worked  up ; both  make  advances  to  the  laborer 
before  the  product  comes  into  market ; both,  in 
reality,  pay  their  own  expenses,  by  sale  of  the 
manufactured  articles ; only,  if  the  goods  sell  at 
a loss,  the  employer  bears  the  loss,  in  the  one  case, 
while,  in  the  other,  the  state  throws  the  loss  on  the 
whole  number  of  the  laborers  in  the  country.  And, 
after  all  this,  the  state,  having  nothing  wherewith 
to  pay  its  expenses  save  the  products  of  labor, 
takes  a part,  it  may  be  a considerable  part,  of 
these  products  {i.  e.,  as  we  have  seen,  of  the  tick- 
ets of  time  representing  them),  for  its  expenses 
and  those  of  its  numberless  agents.  Which  of 
these  processes  is  best  for  the  laborer,  and  gives 
him  the  greater  share  of  the  proceeds  it  may  be 
reasonably  doubted. 

Nor  is  it  so  evident  that  labor  done  for  the 
state  will  be  more  effective  and  hearty  than  that 
done  for  a private  employer,  when  the  system 
seems  to  be  built  on  the  amount  of  average  labor 
or  the  number  of  hours’  work  as  the  divisor,  and 
on  the  gross  amount  of  products  as  the  dividend. 
As  we  have  had  occasion  to  remark  already,  this 
is  a cardinal  point.  The  private  employer  has 
the  remedy  in  his  hands ; but  in  the  socialistic 
state  the  workmen  may  all  be  paralyzed  by  the 
system,  and  there  may  be  found  to  be  such  a want 


FORM  OF  SOCIETY  BY  SOCIALISM  PROBABLE  ? 283 


of  motive  as  to  lower  the  amount  of  products 
much  below  what  it  ought  to  be.  If  this  should 
be  the  case,  it  would  be  fatal  to  the  whole  theory 
of  social  work.  Until  the  socialists  can  show  that 
it  is  not,  men  whom  they  wish  to  convert  to  their 
theory  will  hesitate  long  before  they  admit  it. 

Yet  again j if  the  socialists  should  adhere  so 
rigidly  to  their  present  scheme  of  work,  which  is 
the  foundation  of  the  entire  system,  as  to  pay  no 
regard  to  the  demand  for  specific  articles,  but 
only  to  the  amount  of  labor  incorporated  in  them, 
and  should  fail  to  provide  for  the  mobility  of  la- 
borers, they  would  not  persuade  men  that  their 
system  could  be  stable  and  prosperous.  Unless  it 
can  accommodate  itself  to  the  changing  fashions 
and  wants  of  the  community,  as  the  present  sys- 
tem of  industry  does  with  the  quickness  of  a so- 
cial barometer — if  we  may  so  express  ourselves — 
many  will  believe  that  it  must  collapse.  Other 
states  may  suflFer  terrible  disasters,  and  recover 
from  them  by  means  of  private  enterprise;  but 
the  social  state  commits  itself  to  one  line  of  ac- 
tion, from  which  it  cannot  deviate  and  on  which 
there  is  no  going  back.  At  least,  this  would  be 
an  apprehension  which  would  make  many  slow  in 
consenting  to  its  exclusive  control. 

But,  after  all,  political  economy  and  the  inter- 
ests of  work  by  no  means  make  up  the  whole  of 
life.  There  will  be  multitudes  who  may  have 
very  little  knowledge  on  such  points,  who  yet  will 


2S4  IS  THE  OVERTHROW  OF  THE  PRESENT 

ask  Ilow  socialism  will  affect  the  individual,  the 
family,  the  government,  morals,  religion,  and  all 
spiritual  and  moral  forces,  about  which  the  social- 
ists seem  to  care  little.  Unless  these  can  be  sa.tis- 
fied  that  the  character  of  the  people  to  which 
they  belong — taking  that  term  in  its  widest  ex- 
tent— will  not  be  deteriorated  by  social  institu- 
tions, they  will  not  readily  join  in  pulling  do^vn 
existing  ones,  which,  with  all  their  defects,  en- 
courage much  that  is  noble  in  life  and  manners. 

And  in  this  feeling  many  socialists  will  join  ; 
for  the  breach  with  all  the  thoughts  and  habits 
of  ancient  society  will  be  so  entire,  there  will  be 
such  a divorce  from  history  and  the  past,  that 
many,  to  whom  the  question  of  work  is  not  the 
all-absorbing  one,  will  be  unable  to  bring  them- 
selves to  participate  in  the  social  revolution,  or 
even  to  wish  it  success. 

It  seems  certain,  then,  that  the  change  in  society 
must  be  effected,  if  effected  at  all,  by  violence.  If 
the  socialists  should  not  wish  to  appeal  to  violent 
measures,  such  an  appeal  would  come  from  the 
partisans  of  existing  society.  The  advantage  in 
such  an  appeal  v/ould  at  first  be  greatly  in  favor 
of  established  order ; for,  as  the  socialists  have 
always  shown  the  conviction  that  their  question 
is  not  national,  but  universal,  so  the  anti-socialists, 
of  all  political  shades  and  national  antipathies,  will, 
as  a matter  of  course,  join  their  forces,  for  it  is  a 
question  of  self-preservation.  Taa  res  agitur^ 


FORM  OF  SOCIETY  BY  SOCIALISM  PROBABLE  ? 285 


paries  cum  pi'^oximus  ardeL  Tlie  spirit  of  in- 
ternationalism would  tlien  pervade  all  nations ; for 
not  only  changes  in  government,  but  a wholesale 
destruction  of  property,  would  be  involved  in  the 
struggle.  Nor  could  there  be  any  compromise, 
unless  social  principles  on  the  part  of  the  enemies 
of  present  society  were  abandoned — that  is,  unless 
the  struggle  came  to  be  one  for  the  mere  rule  of 
society  and  for  spoils.  The  socialists  could  accept 
of  no  such  issue  or  they  woidd  meet  with  certain 
ruin ; for  their  principles  are  their  only  strength. 
Now,  in  such  a contest,  it  is  not  at  all  likely  that 
the  outbreak  would  be  simultaneous  everywhere  in 
a circle  of  nations.  It  is  not  even  likely  that  so- 
cialism would  be  so  strong  in  all  of  them  as  to 
feel  itself  everywhere  equal  to  the  measures  of  vio- 
lence which  would  be  necessary.  There  would  be, 
then,  an  advantage  on  the  side  of  existing  order. 
Government  and  property,  where  they  were  strong, 
could  aid  the  forces  of  society  where  the  socialists 
were  strong.  The  separate  states  in  Europe,  for 
instance,  so  often  opposed  in  war  to  one  another, 
would  then  be  united  against  the  foes  of  existing 
order.  Could  the  result  be  doubtful?  Property 
and  capital  would  be  on  one  side,  and  a large  proh 
etarian  mass  on  the  other,  without  supplies  or 
credit ; able  to  do  vast  mischief,  without  question, 
but  not  able  to  gain  their  end ; — no  nearer  to  the 
time  when  all  men  with  hands  would  be  either 
the  agents  or  the  workingmen  of  the  state. 


286  OVERTHROW  OF  SOCIETY  BY  SOCIALISM. 

The  socialistic  party  is,  perhaps,  encouraged  by 
the  seeming  apathy  of  a large  part  of  society  in 
regard  to  their  ultimate  plans.  But  they  can 
hardly  believe  that  all  who  are  not  against  them 
are  for  them.  It  takes  a long  time  for  many  per- 
sons to  conceive  that  any  body  of  men  really  de- 
sire and  are  doing  their  best  to  bring  about  the 
greatest  of  changes — ^not  to  reform  nor  to  trans- 
form, but  to  overthrow  and  build  up  again  on  a 
new  foundation.  To  others  the  project  seems  an 
idle,  Utopian  scheme,  from  which  sober  men, 
who  are  attracted  by  some  of  its  features,  will  in 
the  end  withdraw.  To  others  still  it  may  seem 
that  a party,  the  basis  of  which  is  political  econ- 
omy, has  too  narrow  and  uncertain  a foundation 
for  any  success  at  first  or  stability  afterward ; al- 
though they  ought  to  be  aware  that  political  econ- 
omy is  putting  questions  which  make  differences 
between  parties,  and  between  nations ; and  has 
almost  reached  the  place  occupied  heretofore  by 
doctrines  of  personal  liberty  and  of  the  nature  of 
government.  But,  if  the  social  movement  makes 
much  further  progress,  these  persons  will  see 
that  they  must  form  an  opinion  on  the  great 
point  at  issue,  and  it  cannot  reasonably  be  doubted 
which  side  they  wiU  take. 


FUTURE  PROSPECTS  OF  SOCIALISM. 


287 


FUTURE  PROSPECTS  OP  SOCIALISM. 

Manufacturing  industry  on  a large  scale,  by 
gathering  many  workingmen  together,  aids  their 
united  action  and  gives  rise  to  a general  opinion 
which  is  often  tyrannical  and  overlooks  the  rights 
of  others.  As  workingmen  are  brought  into 
close  contact  with  one  another  and  to  a degree  are 
separated  from  their  fellow-men,  they  are  com- 
pacted into  a class  which  stands  over  against  capi- 
talists and  over  against  the  general  community. 
The  ease  with  which  they  can  be  acted  on  by  re- 
formers and  agitators  gives  them  a false  sense  of 
their  relative  importance ; and,  owing  to  the  facil- 
ity of  their  concerted  action,  while  other  classes 
cannot  readily  unite,  they  throw  other  classes  into 
the  background.  Socialistic  influences  have  had 
little  effect  hitherto  on  those  tillers  of  the  soil 
who  are  not  owners  of  land — such  as  farm-labor- 
ers and  tenants  of  small  farms,  a numerous  class 
in  some  countries  where,  greatly  to  the  detriment 
of  society,  land  is  owned  in  large  masses.  If  the 
agitation  now  so  rife  in  parts  of  Europe  should 
have  the  effect  of  subdividing  the  large  estates 
and  of  converting  tenants  into  proprietors,  it 
would  be  a blessing  for  all  time.  At  present 
many  of  this  class  might  be  led  to  sympathize 


288 


FUTURE  PROSPECTS  OF  SOCIALISM. 


with  socialism,  if  they  could  be  reached  by  its 
emissaries.  But,  for  a time,  they  would  only  count 
on  its  rolls ; they  would  have  little  weight. 

Over  against  the  workingmen  are  placed  by  the 
socialists  the  hourgeoisie^  or  third  class,  which 
consists  of  all  who  have  property,  whether  in- 
vested in  their  business,  or  kept  as  a provision  for 
their  own  and  their  families’  support.  This  class 
touches  the  proletarian  class,  which  has  only 
daily  work  for  its  dependence.  Yet  even  this 
distinction  from  others  of  the  bourgeoisie  often 
disappears,  as  in  the  case  of  a man  who  lives  by 
manual  labor,  deposits  his  surplus  earnings  in  a 
savings-bank,  and  at  length  is  able  to  buy  a house 
or  land.  Some  of  its  members,  again,  may  envy 
others  who  have  superior  wealth,  and  on  this  side 
may  be  open  to  socialistic  influences ; yet  many 
others  know  well  that  the  interests  of  all  with 
whom  they  do  business  are  closely  linked  to- 
gether. They  are  well  aware  that  no  industrious 
class,  which^  does  not  live  on  social  vice  and  is 
permanent,  can  be  otherwise  than  helpful  to  the 
other  classes  of  society ; and  so  their  maxim  is,  if 
they  are  prudent  and  temperate : Live  and  let 
live.” 

The  nature  of  the  modern  state  presses  to- 
ward the  obliteration  of  class  distinctions.”  So 
says  an  eminent  German,  Heinrich  von  Treitsch- 
ke.  This  is  true,  because  legislative  power  is 
not  confined  to  the  upper  classes  or  their  repre- 


FUTURE  PROSPECTS  OF  SOCIALISM. 


289 


sentatives ; because  education  runs  wider  through 
and  further  down  the  stratification  of  society 
than  formerly ; because  the  noble  class,  where  it 
remains,  has  become  relatively  weaker ; and  be- 
cause there  are  examples  of  states  with  no  politi- 
cal gradations  and  where  social  differences  are  not 
aided  by  law. 

The  socialistic  agitation  strives  to  keep  up  the 
feeling  of  class  distinctions.  Logically,  and  by 
way  of  definition,  we  may  say  that  one  who  has 
nothing  laid  up  and  works  with  his  hands  belongs 
to  one  class ; and  a man  who  owns  his  tools  of 
trade  and  has  direct  connection  with  those  who 
v/ant  his  products,  belongs  to  another.  A man 
who  cuts  kindling  wood  with  a sawing-machine, 
and  is  the  owner  of  a horse  and  wagon,  has  capi- 
tal and  works  also ; he  must,  therefore,  be  ranked 
with  the  bourgeoisie  ” — with  capitalists,  for  in- 
stance, who  own  instruments  of  production,  and 
do  not  generally  work  with  their  hands.  It  is 
striking  that  no  word  has  been  coined  in  English 
or  in  German  to  represent  this  word  and  the  other 
Yrenah.  proletariat.  Does  not  this  show 
that  there  was  no  real  use  for  their  existence,  until 
the  socialists  began  to  draw  a wide  line  of  separa- 
tion between  these  two  conditions  of  society  ? 

The  question  may  now  be  put : “ What  is  and 
must  be  the  feeling  of  this  class  toward  the  pro- 
ject of  a socialistic  state,  when  they  begin  to  com^ 
prehend  its  nature  and  meaning  ? ” 

13 


290 


FUTURE  PROSPECTS  OF  SOCIALISM. 


1.  The  essential  characteristic  of  this  portion  of 
the  community  is  that  they  own  property  which 
is  the  means  of  production  ; and  we  cannot  sepa- 
rate from  them  their  helpers,  of  various  names — 
journeymen,  apprentices,  clerks,  porters,  domestic 
servants,  all  the  officials  of  public  corporations, 
and  the  like — who,  if  they  are  not  proprietors, 
may  become  such,  and  who  know  the  value  of 
property  as  an  institution  of  society.  Men  may 
talk  as  they  please  about  the  evils  of  individual- 
ism and  of  a society  founded  on  the  selfish  prin- 
ciple ; but  after  all  there  are  two  poles  of  human 
nature  and  society,  which  are  both  necessary : — 
that  the  human  being  should  feel  himself  to  be  a 
separate  entity,  and  that  he  should  belong  to  a 
body  as  one  of  its  members.  Neither  the  varie- 
ties of  human  character,  nor  independence  and 
enterprise,  nor  any  of  the  higher  practical  virtues 
of  our  nature  could  exist  without  giving  free 
scope  to  individuality ; that  is,  to  freedom.  The 
family  furnishes  a sphere  for  the  exercise  of  both 
principles,  and  thus  harmonizes  the  two  tenden- 
cies of  man.  Socialism  fetters  individuality,  and 
restricts  the  free  choice  of  a career  and  the  pro- 
curement of  objects  for  gratifying  the  tastes  and 
desires.  This  it  does  by  almost  destroying  pri- 
vate property.  It  will  not  be  strange,  therefore, 
if  all  who  have  property,  small  or  great  in  amount, 
shall  stoutly  oppose  socialism,  as  being  opposed  to 
the  free  development  of  personality. 


FUTURE  PROSPECTS  OF  SOCIALISM. 


291 


This  feeling  is  as  strong  in  the  poor  man  who 
has  property,  as  in  the  rich.  A man  may  be  satis- 
fied with  a small  amount  of  property;  but  that 
amount  is  precious.  A benevolent  man  may  value 
the  privilege  of  acquiring  property  by  means 
which  he  has  chosen ; though  he  gives  it  away  as 
fast  as  he  makes  it.  The  feeling  is  in  all  men. 

The  feeling,  however,  seems  to  be  particularly 
strong  in  owners  of  land.  The  connection  of  a 
farmer  with  his  farm  is  more  a love  than  a ra- 
tional estimate.  It  is  like  our  love  for  our  coun- 
try, founded  on  numberless  events  in  the  past 
which  may  now  be  forgotten.  If  everything 
which  we  own  gives  us  a gratification  as  being 
ours,  the  ownership  of  the  soil  adds  also  to  our 
feeling  of  importance.  There  is  a portion  of  the 
earth’s  surface  where  we  have  exclusive  control, 
which  we  may  forbid  any  one  to  enter  upon,  as 
we  may  shut  the  rest  of  the  world  out  of  our 
houses. 

Now  can  any  one  expect  that  a free  cultivator, 
who  determines  for  himself  what  he  shall  raise, 
what  shall  be  wood-land,  what  shall  be  pasture- 
land,  who  pleases  himself  by  planting  and  plan- 
ning for  years  to  come — can  any  one  expect  that 
such  a man  will  willingly  surrender  his  acres  to 
the  state,  leaving  it  to  the  state  thenceforth  to  di- 
rect how  they  are  to  be  manured  and  tilled  and 
what  part  of  the  crop  shall  be  his?  The  most 
accepted  kind  of  socialistic  cultivation  of  land 


292 


FUTURE  PROSPECTS  OF  SOCIALISM. 


is  by  means  of  associations  under  state  agents. 
Is  it  credible  that  an  owner  of  a farm  would  will- 
ingly surrender  it  to  the  state  and  work  for  the 
state,  getting  his  tickets  of  hours’  labor  and  hav- 
ing nothing  to  do  with  the  choice  of  crops  or  the 
method  of  cultivation;  taking,  indeed,  what  his 
Avaiits  require  for  the  day  or  week,  but  reckoning 
for  everything  as  a fiduciary  or  a serf  ? To  me, 
at  least,  it  is  incredible.  He  would  regard  it  as  a 
sinking  down  into  serfdom. 

Nor  is  it  more  probable  that  a man  thus  dispos- 
sessed would  be  satisfied,  at  least  in  this  country, 
with  arguments  adduced  to  show  that  he  has  no 
title,  in  justice,  to  his  fields.  “If  the  state  ever 
had  a title,”  he  would  say,  “ that  title  was  con- 
veyed to  those  from  whom  I derived  it,  and  mo- 
tives v/ere  lield  out  to  them  to  take  the  lands  of- 
fered for  sale ; the  land  offered  and  received  was 
meant  to  be  transferred  in  perpetuity ; constitu- 
tions and  laws  have  confirmed  the  transferred  land, 
which  has  now  become  mine,  as  much  as  the  state 
can  make  it  mine.  The  United  States  have  parted 
by  gift,  or  at  a small  price,  with  many  millions  of 
acres  to  settlers ; and  would  be  bound,  if  a state  of 
the  Union  were  disposed  to  seize  on  the  lands  of 
its  citizens,  to  resist  and  put  down  such  attempts ; 
for  the  lands  were  either  sold  by  the  general  gov- 
ernment before  the  state  existed,  or  the  right  to 
them  was  retained,  or  it  was  parted  with  to  the 
new  states  and  conveyed  by  them  to  settlers.  In 


FUTURE  PROSPECTS  OF  SOCIALISM. 


293 


any  case,  the  property,  the  state’s  power  of  sell- 
ing over  again,  or  of  taking  back,  or  of  restrict- 
ing sales  by  settlers,  was  parted  with  forever ; 
and  if  such  power  should  be  usurped  by  the  state 
the  courts  of  the  Union  might  be  authorized  to 
interfere.  Indeed,  such  attempts  by  one  of  the 
states,  imbued  with  socialistic  principles,  might 
provoke  other  states,  if  lands  of  their  citizens  were 
invaded  and  ^expropriated,’  to  complain  and  to 
resent  the  wrong.  Until,  the]*efore,”  he  would  say, 

the  Federal  Constitution  and  that  of  each  and 
every  state  shall  be  altered  so  as  to  conform  to  the 
socialistic  model,  1 may  be  quite  sure  of  having 
powerful  protectors  against  public  as  well  as  pri- 
vate invaders  of  my  rights.  If  the  United  States 
attempted  to  do  this,  the  state  would  resist ; if  a 
state  attempted  it,  the  United  States  would  bring 
the  wrong  before  its  tribunals.  And,  possibly, 
another  of  the  states  w^ould  endeavor  to  redress 
the  wrong  done  to  one  of  its  own  citizens.” 

In  countries  with  a less  complicated  form  of 
government  it  might  be  easier,  as  far  as  the  op- 
position from  the  classes  interested  in  preserving 
the  existing  order  of  things  could  be  counted  on, 
to  carry  out  the  programme  of  destroying  the  indi- 
vidual right  of  property,  especially  of  landed  prop- 
erty ; but  everywhere  attempts  to  socialize  ” all 
institutions  will  be  met  by  determined  resistance. 

2.  And  that  this  resistance  would  in  many 
countries  be  effectual ; that  socialism,  if  it  should 


294 


FUTURE  PROSPECTS  OF  SOCIALISM. 


attempt  violent  revolution,  would  be  put  down,  is 
made  probable  by  the  strength  and  resources  of 
the  conservative  part  of  society — that  is,  of  those 
who  can  be  united  in  preserving  and  defending 
private  property.  We  may,  I believe,  lay  it  down 
that  the  agricultural  class  in  all  countries  which 
raise  their  own  food  must  constitute  full  one-half 
of  the  population.  In  France,  some  years  since, 
when  the  population  was  estimated  to  be  about 
thirty-seven  millions,  the  holders  of  lands  amount- 
ed to  6,000,000,  who,  with  their  families,  would 
make  up  considerably  more  than  half  of  the  in- 
habitants. This,  indeed,  includes  owners  of  houses 
in  towns,  as  well  as  in  the  country,  together  with 
a number  of  tenants ; but  the  small  landholders 
are  the  largest  class  in  the  country.  In  the 
United  States,  according  to  the  last  census  of 
1870,  the  number  of  males  in  all  occupations  was 
just  over  twelve  millions  and  a half.  Of  these 
nearly  six  millions  belonged  to  the  agricultural 
class  and  2,707,421  were  engaged  in  manufactur- 
ing and  mining  industry.  Under  the  head  of  the 
professional  and  personal  class  2,684,793  were 
counted,  and  under  that  of  trade,  commerce,  and 
transportation  1,191,238.  A part  of  this  last  de- 
scription of  persons  might  join  in  socialistic  move- 
ments, and  a few  of  those  pertaining  to  the  other 
classes ; but  we  should  probably  go  far  beyond  the 
truth  if  we  admitted  that  one-third  of  the  people 
might  be  won  over  to  the  socialistic  side. 


FUTURE  PROSPECTS  OF  SOCIALISM. 


295 


In  the  Scandinavian  countries,  and  in  Russia, 
since  the  abolition  of  serfdom,  the  part  of  the 
population  which  could  be  affected  by  socialistic 
movements  must  be  small.  The  same  is  true  of  ^ 
Southwestern  Germany,  although  to  a less  extent. 

In  Great  Britain  the  showing  is  not  so  -favor- 
able for  the  stability  and  order  of  existing  society. 
In  the  Financial  Reform  Almanac  for  18Y9,  the 
number  of  persons  in  the  professional  classes  is 
stated  to  be  about  six  hundred  and  eighty-four 
thousand;  in  the  commercial  classes,  815,000; 
in  the  agricultural  classes  1,657,000  ; in  the  in- 
dustrial, 6,140,000,  including  persons  engaged  in 
manufacturing  employments,  shopkeeping,  etc.,  of 
whom  1,770,000  are  women  ; and  in  the  domestic 
classes  5,905,000,  of  whom  all  but  244,728  are 
females,  who  are  principally  household  servants. 
From  these  data  we  may  with  some  confidence,  if 
not  with  certainty,  infer  that  operatives  in  manu- 
facturing employments,  greatly  outnumber  agri- 
cultural workers  ; and  it  is  probable  that  the  lat- 
ter could  not  be  relied  upon  in  a contest  between 
capital  and  labor.  The  number  of  small  land- 
owners  is  far  less  than  in  France  or  the  United 
States,  in  proportion  to  the  acreage  of  the  king- 
dom. Yet  the  aids  in  preventing  social  disor- 
ganization— such  as  colonization  and  the  readi- 
ness with  which  the  governing  classes  have  for 
a long  time  met  the  wants  and  the  demands  of 
the  people — must  not  be  left  out  of  account.  The 


296 


FUTURE  PROSPECTS  OF  SOCIALISM. 


temper  of  the  nation  is  not  decidedly  aristo- 
cratic, and  classes  have  not  had  that  embittered 
spirit  toward  each  other  which  shows  itself  in 
portions  of  the  Continent ; so  that  the  principles 
of  rank  socialism,  notwithstanding  or,  rather,  on 
account  of  the  freedom  of  speech  and  the  press, 
have  taken  little  hold  of  Great  Britain. 

3.  It  seems  to  the  writer,  also,  that  the  social- 
ists undervalue  the  means  and  power  of  combina- 
tion of  the  classes  which  are  naturally  opposed  to 
them,  as  much  as  the  thinking  men  of  these 
classes  undervalue  the  force  of  the  arguments  for 
a social  change,  and  the  hold  which  socialistic  ar- 
guments have  already  gained,  and  are  likely  to 
gain  in  the  future  over  the  minds  of  the  working 
classes.  The  towns,  the  arenas  of  the  new  agita- 
tion, feel  their  strength  unduly  and  despise  the 
country,  where  ideas  move  slowly  because  men 
live  apart.  But  this  is  a grievous  error.  If  they 
cannot  get  the  country  people  to  act  on  their  side 
— to  give  up  their  farms  and  houses  and  domes- 
tic animals  to  the  state,  and  receive  daily  work 
for  daily  wages  as  the  state’s  laborers — their  cause 
is  lost.  And  that  they  cannot  have  this  art  of 
persuasion  everything  seems  to  show.  If  they 
think  that  because  the  workingmen  are  with  them 
they  can  conquer  the  country,  they  will  be  griev- 
ously deceived.  The  cultivator  of  the  soil  can  do 
without  the  manufacturing  laborers  more  easily 
than  these  without  them. 


FUTURE  PROSPECTS  OF  SOCIALISM.  297 


If,  however,  that  to  which  we  have  referred  al- 
ready more  than  once  should  be  found  to  be  a law 
of  social  progress — that  the  free  use  of  private 
property  must  end  in  making  a few  capitalists  of 
enormous  wealth  and  a vast  population  of  labor- 
ers dependent  on  them ; and  if  there  could  be  no 
choice  but  between  this  disease  of  free  society 
and  the  swallowing  up  of  all  property  by  the  state 
— then,  we  admit,  it  would  be  hard  to  choose  be- 
tween the  two  evils.  Nothing  would  lead  the 
mass  of  men  to  embrace  socialism  sooner  than 
the  conviction  that  this  enormous  accumulation 
of  capital  in  a few  hands  was  to  be  not  only  an 
evil  infact^  if  not  prevented,  but  a necessary  evil^ 
beyond  prevention.  AVe  have  no  desire  to  see  a 
return  of  the  time  of  the  latifundia^'^  or  broad 
farms,  which,  as  Pliny  the  Elder  said,  were  the 
ruin  of  Italy.  If  such  a tendency  should  mani- 
fest itself,  it  would  run  through  all  the  forms  of 
property.  A Stewart  or  a Claflin  would  root  out 
smaller  tradespeople.  Holders  of  small  farms 
would  sink  into  tenants.  The  buildings  of  a city 
would  belong  to  a few  owners.  Small  manufac- 
turers would  have  to  take  pay  from  mammoths  of 
their  own  kind  or  be  ruined.  Then  would  the 
words  of  the  prophet  be  fulfilled:  ^^AYoe  unto 
them  that  join  house  to  house,  that  lay  field  to 
field,  till  there  be  no  place  that  they  may  be 
placed  alone  in  the  earth.’’  For,  if  this  went  to 
an  extreme  in  a free  country,  the  expropriated  ” 
13* 


298 


FUTURE  PROSPECTS  OF  SOCIALISM. 


could  not  endure  it.  They  would  go  to  some 
other  country,  and  leave  these  proprietors  alone 
in  the  land,  or  would  drive  them  away.  A revo- 
lution, slow  or  rapid,  would  certainly  bring  about 
a new  order  of  things. 

But  the  danger  of  convulsions,  or  even  of  an 
overthrow  of  existing  society,  does  not  arise  from 
any  inevitable  law,  involving  the  loss  of  individ- 
ual freedom,  or  impairing  the  strength  of  the 
family  principle.  The  legislation  of  England 
within  the  present  century — defending  the  weak 
against  the  strong,  protecting  the  health  of  opera- 
tives, guarding  women  and  children  against  over- 
work, providing  for  the  reference  of  disputes  be- 
tween employer  and  workman  to  arbitrators,  al- 
lowing unions  and  combinations  between  the 
workmen  for  carrying  out  their  plans,  giving 
them  a larger  interest  atid  right  in  political  af- 
fairs— shows  what  an  enlightened  nation  can  do 
when  social  evils  become  alarming.  And  if  the 
difficulties  attending  the  free  sale  of  landed  prop- 
erties in  small  parcels  could  be  removed,  there 
can  scarcely  be  a doubt  that  a land-owning  peas- 
antry would  be  another  strong  force  on  the  side 
of  the  stability  of  public  institutions.  But  our 
fears  do  not  proceed  from  any  belief  that  govern- 
ments on  the  existing  foundations  of  individual 
freedom  cannot  go  on  reforming,  while  yet  they 
remain  true  to  the  principle  of  individual  free- 
dom. These  fears  arise  from  the  influence,  now 


FUTURE  PROSPECTS  OF  SOCIALISM. 


299 


manifest,  of  a low  sort  of  unprincipled  or  fanatical 
demagogues ; from  the  insobriety  of  workingmen ; 
from  the  decay  of  religious  faith,  and  the  sure 
weakness  of  moral  principle  and  the  instability 
of  social  habits  without  this  great  regulator.  Our 
hopes  point  (in  the  United  States  at  least),  to  the 
conditions  and  tendencies  of  society ; to  the  con- 
tinual parcelling  of  estates  among  heirs;  to  the 
opening  to  all  classes,  by  the  facilities  of  educa- 
tion, of  all  positions  and  employments.  And  when 
we  think  of  the  materialistic  and  even  atheistic 
dogmas,  which  hide  the  face  of  God  from  so 
many  of  the  poor,  we  are  consoled  by  the  faith 
that  the  religion  of  Christ  can  never  die,  that  it 
can  revive  a nation  ^;t  its  lowest  ebb  of  prosper- 
ity. The  present  century,  more  than  any  age  be- 
fore, has  tested  the  power  of  Christianity  to 
propagate  itself  through  all  the  races  of  man- 
kind. Even  now  it  is  showing  its  humane  coun- 
tenance to  the  gloomy  and  rancorous  communists 
of  France,  like  a new  friend,  having  nothing  to 
do  with  state  polity,  but  only  with  reforming  the 
inner  man,  and  in  fact  coming  from  abroad.  If 
this  friend  of  man  can  work  in  its  own  legitimate 
way,  the  peace  of  society  will  be  restored,  and 
whatever  opposes  the  best  interests  of  any  por- 
tion of  society  must  come  to  an  end. 


IlJTDEX 


Ahrens,  251. 

Amana,  communities  at.  See  Inspirationists. 

American  communities,  50-84.  See  Shakers ; Rapp  ; Har- 
mony ; Zoarites ; Amana  Inspirationists ; Perfection- 
ists ; Oneida;  Wallingford;  Brotherhood  of  Common 
Life. 

Anabaptists  of  Munster,  42-50;  fanaticism  of  the  sect  at 
first,  42  ; opinions,  43  ; Thomas  Miinzer,  43  ; Rottmann 
at  Munster,  45 ; Anabaptists  get  possession  of  the  city, 
46  ; Mattbys  and  John  of  Leyden,  47,  48  ; the  latter  be- 
comes king,  49;  new  constitution  of  the  city,  47,  48; 
siege  of  it,  and  destruction  of  the  leaders,  49,  50. 

Antonelli,  concerned  in  BaboeuFs  conspiracy,  103. 

Aristotle,  his  criticism  on  Plato’s  republic,  87,  89. 

Atkinson,  Edward,  on  the  share  of  the  product  going  to  the 
owner  of  capital,  169. 

Baboeuf,  his  conspiracy  in  1796,  102-105. 

Bakunin,  a Russian  Nihilist,  his  adventures,  147  ; his  opin- 
ions, ibid.  ; forms  an  atheistic  section  in  the  Interna- 
tional, 149  ; expelled  with  the  section,  on  the  ground 
of  forming  a secret  society,  ibid. 

Bazard,  a scholar  of  St.  Simon,  107 ; breaks  with  Enfantin, 

111. 


S02 


INDIi:X. 


Blanc,  Louis,  his  career  and  writings,  122,  123  ; the  ateliers, 
123;  a losing  experiment,  124;  he  defends  the  family, 
but  not  inheritance,  ibid. ; his  importance  in  the  prog- 
ress of  socialism,  125. 

Boruttau,  his  atheism,  247. 

Brissot  de  Warville,  10,  102. 

Brotherhood  of  the  New  Life,  81-84. 

Brown,  Thomas,  his  charges  against  the  Shakers,  56,  57. 

Buchez,  a disciple  of  St.  Simon,  112. 

Buddhist  mendicant  order,  26-29. 

Buonarotti,  concerned  in  Baboeuf’s  conspiracy,  104 ; pub*- 
lished  the  plan  in  1828,  ibid. 


Cabet,  Etienne,  his  career,  118;  his  “Voyage  to  Icaria,” 
ibid. ; his  colony  in  the  United  States,  ibid. ; unsuccess- 
ful, and  why,  ibid.,  69  ; his  opinions,  especially  his  com- 
munistic creed,  119-122  ; humane  and  averse  to  force, 
121. 

Caimes,  Prof.,  cited,  170. 

Campanella,  his  life,  93  ; his  “ City  of  the  Sun,”  93-95  ; hi& 
chief  magistrate  a religious  autocrat,  95  ; loose  as  to 
marriage,  ibid. 

Collectivism,  definition,  4;  a French  term,  used  also  by 
Germans,  ibid. 

Commune  in  Paris,  1870,  154-158. 

Communism  defined,  1,  2,  7 ; other  definitions,  12. 

Communities  in  the  United  States,  conclusions  concerning 
them,  67-72. 

Community  of  goods  in  the  early  Christian  church,  34-37 ; 
voluntary,  local,  temporary,  ibid. 

Constant,  the  Abbe,  his  communistic  ideas,  116. 


Dalai  Lama,  in  Thibet,  29. 

Davis,  Mr.  J.  Bancroft,  on  the  socialistic  voters  in  Germany, 
190, 

Diognetus,  epistle  to,  cited,  86. 


INDEX. 


303 


Dupont,  E.,  Secretary  of  the  International,  139,  143,  153. 
Dwight,  Dr.,  on  the  Shakers,  56,  57. 


Eisenach,  programme  of  the  social  Democratic  Working- 
men’s Party  there  (in  1869),  183-186. 

Enfantin,  a disciple  of  St.  Simon,  109;  his  idea  of  mar- 
riage, 110-111. 

Egypt,  home  of  the  Therapeutae,  32;  and  of  the  earliest 
monks,  37. 

Eotvos,  Baron  J.,  on  the  essential  despotism  of  socialism, 
267-271. 

Equality,  influence  of  the  feeling  of,  for  socialism,  277-279. 

Equals,  conspiracy  of  the,  102.  Comp.  Baboeuf. 

Esquiros,  a religious  communist  mentioned,  116. 

Essenes,  29-31  ; time  of  first  appearance,  29 ; authorities 
for,  30 ; Dr.  Lightfoot  on,  ibid.  ; number  of,  in  Judea, 
ibid.  ; doctrines  and  practices  of,  ibid. 


Fourier,  his  principal  works,  113 ; not  fully  a communist  in 
principle,  ibid. ; sought  to  make  work  agreeable,  ibid.  ; 
his  phalanxes  and  phalansteries,  114  ; his  fantastic  no- 
tions, ibid.  ; immoral  views,  115. 


Gotha,  union  there  of  the  Workingmen’s  Union,  and  Work- 
ingmen’s Party,  187 ; a virtual  extinction  of  the  former, 
ibid.;  programme  of  Gotha  (1875),  187-190. 


Harmonist  community,  61 , 75,  76.  See  Rapp. 

Harris,  T.  L.,  founder  of  Brotherhood  of  New  Life,  his 
views,  81-83. 

Hasenclever,  a social  democrat,  on  marriage,  257. 

Hatzfeld,  Countess  of,  173;  relations  to  Lassalle,  173,  174; 
head  of  a branch  of  the  Social  Democratic  Party  after 
his  death,  182. 

Hinds,  on  American  communism,  74-84. 


304 


INDEX. 


Inheritance,  discussions  on,  at  Congress  of  Basel,  144-146 ; 
L.  Blanc’s  opinion  as  to,  124;  relations  to  the  family, 
255,  256. 

Inspirationist  communities,  64,  65,  78-80.  Comp.  Amana. 

International,  or  International  Workingmen’s  Society,  126- 
158;  its  forerunners  and  preparations,  126-132  ; founded 
at  London  in  1864,  133,  134 ; principal  founders,  132, 
133  ; Mazzini,  133 ; rules,  134,  135 ; spread,  136,  137  ; 
others,  besides  workingmen,  members,  138 ; congresses 
at  Geneva,  138,  139 ; Lausanne,  139-141 ; Brussels,  143, 
144;  Basel,  144-146;  schism  in  Switzerland,  see  Baku- 
nin ; Franco-Prussian  war  delays  congresses,  146  ; con- 
gress at  the  Hague,  149,  150 ; difficulties  of  the  Inter- 
national, 150-152 ; bitterness  of  the  leading  members, 
152,  153 ; it  had  no  direct  part  in  the  horrors  of  1871 
at  Paris,  155,  156 ; yet  the  general  committee  excused 
them,  157,  158 ; was  injured  in  its  influence  by  the 
events  at  Paris,  158,  159. 

Jager,  his  “Mod erne  Socialismus”  often  cited  and  much 
used,  10,  133,  248,  257,  etc. 

John  of  Leyden,  or  Jan  Bockelson.  See  Anabaptists,  44-50. 

Jorissen,  a social  democrat,  on  marriage,  258. 

J osephus  on  the  Essenes,  30. 

Lamennais,  his  communistic  ideas,  115. 

Land,  problems  concerning,  in  a socialistic  state,  285. 
Comp.  Lange. 

Lange,  F.  A.,  extract  from  his  “ Arbeiterfriige  ” on  the  aboli- 
tion of  private  property  in  land,  271-275. 

Lassalle,  life  and  character  of,  171,  172  ; great  abilities  of, 
and  works,  173-175;  relations  to  Countess  of  Hatzfeld, 
173, 174 ; his  “Workingmen’s Programme,”  176  ; founds 
the  German  Workingmen’s  Union,  176 ; his  vast  exer- 
tions, 177,  178;  death,  179  ; to  what  extent  a socialist, 
179,  180;  his  “iron  law”  of  wages,  180;  examined, 
181 ; his  productive  associations,  179. 


INDEX. 


305 


Lee,  Anne,  foundress  of  the  Shakers,  53-55. 

Leroux,  Pierre,  separated  from  Enfantin,  112 ; his  theoso- 
phism,  117  ; his  opinions,  as  stated  by  two  of  his  schol- 
ars, 117,  118 ; on  the  decay  of  faith  in  France,  245,  246. 

Liebknecht,  an  early  communist,  132  ; founder,  with  Rebel, 
of  the  Social  Democratic  Workingmen’s  Party,  183. 

Lightfoot,  Dr.,  now  Bishop,  on  the  Essenes,  referred  to,  30. 

Mably,  followed  Plato,  97  ; changed  his  views,  ibid.  ; stopped 
halfway  in  his  communism,  97,  98 ; mistake  as  to  Spar- 
ta, ibid. 

Marechal,  a ferocious  member  of  the  ‘‘Equals,”  104. 

Marriage,  in  Plato’s  republic,  89 ; inEnfantin’s  scheme,  110; 
Cabet  and  L.  Blanc  defend  it,  119,  124  ; German  social- 
ists not  loose  on  this  point,  in  their  theory,  254;  their 
system  tends  to  weaken  the  relation,  256-258. 

Marx,  Karl,  a socialist  in  early  life,  130 ; a fugitive  on  ac- 
count of  his  opinions,  ibid. ; finally,  a kind  of  exile  in 
London,  ibid.  ; principal  founder  of  the  International, 
133 ; a Hegelian  in  his  philosophy,  161  ; his  work  on 
“Capital,”  ibid.;  obscurity  of  his  views,  ibid.  ; takes  for 
granted  the  injustice  of  private  property,  164 ; his  lead- 
ing doctrine,  that  all  increased  value  of  material  be- 
longs to  the  laborer  examined,  165-171 ; his  atheism, 
247. 

Mazzini,  present  at  the  first  meeting  of  the  International, 
133  ; had  not  much  in  common  with  the  socialists,  ibid. 

Mehring,  his  “ Social  Democracy”  cited,  174,  189,  191,  192, 
and  elsewhere. 

Mill,  J.  S.,  on  the  remuneration  of  capital,  169  ; his  chap- 
ters on  socialism,  a summary  of,  controverts  the  doc- 
trine that  the  pressure  of  population  on  subsistence  must 
always  be  growing  more  severe,  195  ; denies  that  wages 
are  low  and  tend  to  fall,  194 ; thinks  that  the  socialist 
notion  of  the  workings  of  competition  is  imperfect,  195, 
196  ; taxes  them  with  misapprehension  as  to  the  share 
of  the  product  taken  by  capital,  197 ; speaks  of  the  diffi- 


306 


INDEX. 


culties  of  socialism,  198, 199  ; admits  the  possibility  of  its 
being  the  best  form  of  society  at  some  future  day,  200. 

More,  Sir  T.,  his  Utopia,  89-92. 

Morelly,  his  “ Code  of  Nature,”  99  ; long  unnoticed,  ibid. ; to 
what  his  influence  has  been  due,  100 ; his  fundamental 
laws  of  society,  100,  101. 

Most,  J. , his  faith  in  the  productiveness  of  labor  in  a social 
state,  22. 

Monastic  orders,  37-41 ; monk  and  hermit  compared,  40. 

Munster,  Anabaptists  of.  See  Anabaptists. 

Miinzer,  Thomas,  42,  43. 

Mutualism,  from  the  French,  1 ; sense  of  the  word,  4. 

Nordhoff,  Charles,  his  work  on  the  communistic  societies 
of  the  United  States  often  cited,  53-66. 

Noyes,  J.  H. , founder  of  the  communities  of  Perfectionists, 
his  “ History  of  American  Socialisms”  cited,  52,  65,  66 ; 
his  essential  modification  of  his  system  in  1879,  73,  74. 


Oneida  Community.  See  Perfectionists ; Noyes. 

Owen,  R.,  52,  61 ; failure  of  his  communities  in  the  United 
States,  ibid.  ; causes  of  the  failure,  69. 


Pachomius,  in  Egypt,  devises  a union  of  Anchorites,  38. 

Perfectionists,  of  Oneida  and  Wallingford,  their  opinions  and 
practices,  65,  66 ; modifications  in  their  practice  in  1 879, 
73,  74. 

Philo  the  Jew,  on  the  Essenes,  31 ; on  the  Therapeutae,  32,  33. 

Plato,  his  republic,  85-89  ; was  it  an  “ idea”  ? 87. 

Pliny  the  Elder,  on  the  Essenes,  30. 

Property,  individual  or  private,  opposed  by  all  communists, 
1,  2;  communities  within  the  state  have  to  acknowl- 
edge the  right  of,  3 ; how  socialists  would  get  rid  of 
property,  36,  C'omp.  Schaeflle. 

Proudhon,  not  strictly  a communist,  10,  11 ; cited,  to  show 
this,  ibid. 


INDEX. 


307 


Ranke,  cited  as  to  the  Anabaptists  of  Munster,  44-50. 

Rapp,  George,  founder  of  the  Community  of  Harmony, 
61. 

Religion  under  socialism,  its  prospects,  243-253. 
Rhys-Davids,  his  Buddhism  cited,  27,  and  used,  28,  29. 
Rottmann,  at  Munster,  helped  on  the  Anabaptist  movement, 
45,  49. 

Rousseau  not  strictly  a communist,  97. 


St.  Simon,  his  life,  107 ; opinions,  ibid. ; views  of  his  follow- 
ers, 108,  109;  schism  among  his  followers.  111;  L. 
Stein’s  estimate  of,  ibid. ; had  a number  of  noteworthy 
disciples,  112. 

Schaeffle,  his  “Quintessence  of  Socialism”  reviewed  at 
length  and  briefly  examined,  201-226 ; his  definition, 
14;  general  plan,  201-204;  they  think  time  is  working 
with  them,  205 ; question  of  right,  207 ; compensation 
to  capitalists,  207,  208 ; great  promises  to  workingmen, 
209;  costs,  question  of,  in  social  production,  211,  212; 
value  in  use  disregarded  by  them,  213  ; wide  sweep  of 
the  social  plan,  214-218;  difiBculties  of  socialism,  218- 
220  ; private  income  under  socialistic  organization,  220- 
222;  religion,  marriage,  etc.,  223-225. 

Schweitzer,  Alexander,  head  of  Lassalle’s  Workingmen’s 
Union  (from  1867  to  1871),  182,  183;  intrigues  against 
him  by  Liebknecht  and  others,  ibid. ; failed  of  reelec- 
tion, ibid. 

Separatists.  See  Zoar. 

Shakers,  50-60 ; founder  of  the,  53  ; opinions  of,  54-57 ; 
discipline  of,  58-60;  resemblances  to  some  ancient  com- 
munities, 50 ; numbers,  51 ; declining,  52. 

Socialism,  definition  of,  2 ; how  it  differs  from  communism, 
7,  9 ; definition  of,  by  a lecturer,  12 ; by  Schaeffle,  14 ; 
the  term  used  as  synonymous  for  communism,  4 ; so- 
cialism, in  the  modern  idea  of  it,  makes  the  state  the  only 
capitalist ; has  never  been  realized,  22  ; Morelly’s  social- 
istic state,  99-101 ; the  Equals  and  their  plan,  104,  105; 


308 


INDEX. 


Fourier  not  strictly  a socialist^  113 ; Cabet  was  such, 
118-122  ; L.  Blanc  prepared  the  way  for  German  social- 
ism, 125  ; the  International,  socialistic.  See  Internation- 
al. Differences  in  the  International  in  regard  to  private 
property,  144-146.  Marx,  the  scientific  organ  of  social- 
ism, 161  (see  Marx) ; how  far  Lassalle  was  a socialist, 
179  (see  Lassalle) ; strict  socialism  triumphing  since  his 
death,  183-190;  its  power  in  Germany,  at  the  polls,  by 
the  press,  190,  191 ; professors  in  the  universities  giving 
it  a partial  support,  192;  the  social  state  necessarily 
despotic,  229-231 ; yet  at  first  must  be  democratic  ip 
form,  232,  233 ; its  relations  to  the  land,  234,  235 ; it^ 
intercourse,  235;  its  finances,  236;  its  taxes,  ibid.; 
weakness  in  war,  237 ; amount  of  patriotism  in,  237 ; 
of  hopefulness  and  enterprise  in,  238,  239 ; circulation 
of  knowledge  in,  241 ; literature  and  public  opinion  in, 
241,  242;  relations  of,  to  religion,  243-253;  to  mar- 
riage, 254-259  ; to  some  now  existing  evils,  260-263  ; to 
humanity,  263,  264;  to  education,  264-267.  A social 
state  necessarily  despotic,  267-271 ; see  Eotvos.  The 
question  of  the  overturn  of  existing  society  by  social- 
ism considered,  276-286 ; opposition  to  it  to  be  expected 
from  smaller  proprietors,  288  ; from  small  landholders, 
291. 

Sparta,  had  some  communistic  elements  in  its  ear^y  instu 
tutions,  18  ; but  these  ceased  before  Aristotle’s  time, 
98,  99. 

State,  the  socialistic,  its  probable  form,  etc.  See  Socialism, 

Stein,  L. , his  social  movements  in  France  often  cited,  as,  111, 
114. 

Sudre,  A.,  his  prize  essay  on  communism  and  socialism  cited, 
101,  244  ; and  elsewhere. 

Therapeutas,  the,  32,  33. 

Tolain,  a founder  of  the  International,  expelled  for  accept- 
ing a place  in  the  French  Assembly  (1870),  157 ; his 
opinions  on  expropriating  land,  142. 


INDEX. 


309 


Treitschke,  von  H.,  his  “ Socialismus  u . s.  Gonner”  cited, 
174 ; his  estimate  of  the  socialists  in  Germany,  190. 

Utopia,  meaning  of  the  word,  90.  Sir  T.  More’s  work  so 
called,  89-93. 

Workingmen’s  Union,  founded  by  Lassalle,  176-178 ; its  des- 
tinies after  his  death,  182,  183. 

Workingmen’s  Party,  the  Social  Democratic,  founded  at 
Eisenach  (1869),  183  ; really  a branch  of  the  Interna- 
tional, 184.  See  Eisenach ; Gotha. 


Zoar,  or  the  Separatists,  62-64,  76-78. 


# 


jU<i 


